HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-19-13 PC Special Meeting Minutes
Approved:July 10, 2013
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA
PLANNING COMMISSION
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 19,2013
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 6:30p.m.
ROLL CALL
Present were: Chair Clayton Larson, Commissioners Angela Hames, Andrew Holewa, Samuel
Scott, Janet Stodola (Alternate), and Roberta Thompson.
Absent: Commissioner Clayton Zimmerman.
Also presentwere:Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler; Community
Development Director Jill Hutmacher;Councilmember Dave McClung; and City Attorney Joel
Jamnik.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA –JUNE 19,2013
Chair Larson stated the agenda will stand as published.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
June 5,2013–Planning Commission Regular Meeting
Commissioner Holewamoved, seconded by Commissioner Thompson, to approve the June
5,2013, Planning Commission Regular Meeting as presented. The motion carried
unanimously (6-0).
PLANNING CASES
A.Planning Case 13-003;Lexington Station Master PUD, Final PUD and Preliminary
Plat;Roberts Management Company –Public Hearing
Community Development Intern Bachlerstated the applicant has requested approval of the
Master Planned Unit Development, Final Planned Unit Development of Phase I, and Preliminary
Plat of the Lexington Station redevelopment proposal.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION –JUNE 19, 20132
Community Development Intern Bachler explained Roberts Development Company owns the
industrial warehouse building at 3771 Lexington Avenue that has been converted to retail use, as
well as the property at 1120 Red Fox Road. They recently closed on the former Blue Fox
property at 3833 Lexington Avenue, which consists of two parcels. The company is in the
process of platting the property to merge the two parcels together. The applicant is proposing a
multi-phased redevelopment at the southwest corner of Red Fox Road and Lexington Avenue
that would include all four parcels. In total, 7.57 acres would be included in the redevelopment
project.
Project Description
Community Development Intern Bachler indicated Phase I would include the demolition of the
Blue Fox Restaurant and the construction of an approximately 15,000 square foot retail building
for up to nine tenants. Two of the larger retail bays have been designed to accommodate
restaurant users. The site plan includes a drive-up window located on the northern side of the
building and outdoor seating areas in front of the two restaurant bays. The primary building
façade would be oriented to the west towards what will become a larger retail center in Phase II
and Phase III. As part of Phase I, the applicant is proposing to remove the three access driveways
on the Blue Fox property. The Phase I building would share the driveways currently providing
access to 3771 Lexington Avenue and 1120 Red Fox Road.
Community Development Intern Bachler stated Phase II of the Master PUD development would
include a remodeling of the existing building at 1120 Red Fox Road. The building would be
reoriented to face east towards the Phase I building. Additional parking would be constructed for
this phase as well. The building is currently used as office and light manufacturing space and the
applicant intends to repurpose the building for retail uses.
For Phase III, the existing building at 3771 Lexington Avenue would be demolished and three
new buildings would be constructed on the lot. Two of these buildings would be two-stories with
retail uses on the main floor and office uses above. The third building would be single-story with
all retail tenants. During Phase III, the applicant has proposed removing the existing driveway
access at 3771 Lexington Avenue and adding a new curb cut entrance at the southern end of this
property directly across from the Target southern drive access. Ramsey County would condition
this new access on the installation of necessary traffic control at the intersection.
Community Development Intern Bachler explained the applicant is also requesting Preliminary
Plat approval for the site. Currently, the area that would comprise Phase I of the development is
divided between two separate parcels: 3833 and 3831 Lexington Avenue. The site is being
replatted in order to combine these two parcels. No subdivisions are taking place.
Planned Unit Development (PUD) Process
Community Development Intern Bachler commented the Planned Unit Development process is a
tool that provides additional flexibility for development that an underlying zoning district would
not otherwise allow. For example, a PUD may make exceptions to setbacks, lot coverage,
parking requirements, signage, building materials, or landscaping requirements. It is intended to
overcome the limitations of zoning regulations and improve the overall design of a project.
While the PUD process allows the City to negotiate certain aspects of the development, any
conditions imposed on the PUD must have a rational basis related to the impacts of the
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION –JUNE 19, 20133
development. A PUD cannot be used to permit uses that would not otherwise be permitted in the
underlying zoning district.
In cases where a PUD covers multiple properties, the project is still often treated as one
comprehensive development; the development as a whole is expected to meet landscaping,
stormwater management, and other similar requirements, while individual properties are given
greater flexibility in achieving these standards. For example, one property within a PUD may
have 50 percent building coverage, but the overall development does not exceed 40 percent
building coverage to maintainconformance with the underlying zoning district. To maintain
shared amenities such as landscaping and stormwater retention ponds, the development is
required to create a legal entity to manage these amenities.
Community Development Intern Bachler statedthe PUD development process is comprised of
multiple steps. The first step is the Master PUD, which is a detailed concept plan for the entire
development proposal outlining the individual phases for the development over a specified
period of time. The City also works with the developer during this stage to set a design
framework for the development. These standards are written into a development agreement,
which generally includes the design standards, a list of conditions, the size of the development,
andwhat deviations from the underlying zoning district will be permitted. A Final PUD proposal
is then submitted prior to the development of each successive phase of the project. This plan
provides a greater level of detail than the Master PUD and must conform to the approved
development agreement.
Site Data
Future Land Use Plan:Commercial
Existing Land Use:Retail strip mall and office building
Zoning:B-3; Service Business District
Current Lot Sizes:7.57 Acres
Topography:Level
Community Development Intern Bachler reviewed the surrounding area and the Plan Evaluation.
Zoning Regulations
Section 1320 –District Provisions
A. Lot Size, Building Coverage, and Landscaping –Flexibility Requested
The minimum lot size in the B3 District is 13,000 square feet. No more than 40 percent of the
total lot area may be covered by a building. In this case, all three lots included in the PUD request
meet these minimum standards. The Zoning Code requires that every lot include 25 percent or
more landscape coverage. Landscaping is defined as all plantings, including trees, grass, and
shrubs. The Master Plan for the site proposes 22.9 percent landscape coverage, slightly less than
the code requirement. The landscaping for Lot One is significantly deficient, however, with only
7.1 percent coverage proposed. Staff would like to credit the applicant for approximately 1,500
square feet of proposed perennial plantings in the Lexington Avenue right of way adjacent to the
Lot One eastern property line. This landscaping isnot required by City Code. Factoring in the
additional coverage, the total landscape coverage would be 9.4 percent for Lot 1.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION –JUNE 19, 20134
While PUD projects should be evaluated based more on whether the Master Plan meets the
standards and less on whether individuallots are deficient, Staff is concerned about the lack of
landscaping being proposed for Lot One. The Planning Commission should determine if the
landscape coverage for Lot One is sufficient given the landscaping plan for the site as a whole.
Lot SizeBuilding % Building Landscape % Landscape
Coverage Coverage Coverage Coverage
(SF) (SF)
Lot 1 –58,27615,63426.8% 4,1247.1%
Building 1
Lot 2 –87,33017,00019.6% 19,63722.6%
Building 2
Lot 3 –184,73835,92819.4% 51,96928.0%
Buildings 3,
4,and 5
Total 330,51068,56220.7% 75,73022.9%
Requirement 13,000 or 40% or less 25% or more
more
B. Height –Meets Requirements
The maximum height for buildings in the B3 District is 35 feet. None of the proposed buildings
would exceed this height.
C. Setbacks –Flexibility Requested
The minimum setback for principal buildings in the B3 District is 50 feet in the front yard, and
20 feet in the rear and side yards. For accessory structures, the minimum setback is 10 feet in the
rear and side yards. In planned unit developments, the building setbacks from the internal lot
lines are less of a concern. The primary concern is the setback measurement from Red Fox Road
and Lexington Avenue, and the adjacent properties to the west and the south of the development.
The following table lists the setbacks for each building.
Red Fox RoadLexington Western Southern
Avenue Boundary Boundary
Phase I -Building #1 52' 20' --
Phase I -Accessory 2' -9" 2' -9" --
Structure
Phase II -Building #2 122' -45' -
Phase III -Building #3 -20' -105'
Phase III -Building #4 --20' 20'
Phase III -Building #5 --20' 165'
Requirement 20 Feet (Principal); 10 50 Feet 20 Feet 20 Feet
Feet (Accessory)
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION –JUNE 19, 20135
The applicant has requested a 20 foot front property line setback for the Phase I building and for
one of the buildings proposed for Phase III of the development. Staff is favorable to this request
given the unusually large County right of way on Lexington Avenue, which measures
approximately 55 feet in width from the Lexington Avenue curb to the property line. The
accessory structure proposed in Phase I would be situated approximately 3 feet from the front and
side property line. This structure willextend out from a proposed retaining wall that will run
along eastern and northern sides of the northeast corner of the property. Staff is favorable to this
proposal because the structure will be entirely screened from view behind the retaining wall. The
other four proposed buildings all meet the minimum setback requirements.
D. Special Regulations for Drive-up Windows in the B3 District –Meets Requirements
Section 1320.09 Subd. 3 states that the proximity requirements of 1,320 feet between drive-in
businesses may be waived if the following provisions are met as determined by the City Council.
The proposed drive-in business in Phase I of the development is located approximately 880 feet
from an existing drive-up window on Lexington Avenue.
1.The operation consists of one or more drive-up windows and is an integral part of a
building containing one or more other allowed uses, or the operation is part of an
architecturally unified complex containing two or more businesses using drive-up
windows.
2.Shared access drives and shared parking are utilized by all such businesses using drive-up
windows in said building or complex.
3.Only one building or architecturally unified complex containing two or more businesses
using drive-up windows will be allowed in addition to one freestanding business using a
drive-up window.
4.The architecture and the site, grading, circulation, landscaping, screening and signage
plans shall unify the appearance and function of the complex or building.
5.An architecturally unified complex may consist of one or more buildings on one or more
parcels if the intent of providing a unified appearance and function is not compromised.
6.The applicant shall submit a circulation plan that demonstrates that the use will not
interfere or reduce thesafety of non-motorized movements, specifically pedestrian and
bicyclists.
Section 1325 –General Regulations
A. Accessory Structures –Section 1325.01 –Meets Requirements
In all zoning districts, an accessory structure cannot exceed the height of the principal structure
on the property. The proposed accessory structure in the first phase of the development is below
the height of the Phase I building. Additionally, the Zoning Code requires accessory structures to
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION –JUNE 19, 20136
have an exterior finish that is compatible in appearance and material used with the principal
structure. In this case, the applicant has proposed using brick and rough faced cast stone for the
accessory structure. These materials are also the two primary materials proposed for the principal
building façade.
B. Additional Requirements for Drive-up Windows –Section 1325.04 –Flexibility Requested
Section 1325.04 of the Zoning Code regulates the location and site development standards of
drive-in businesses in addition to the special regulations outlined for the B3 District. All of the
requirements of this section are met by the proposed development with the exception of the
proximity to other drive-in establishments, which cannot be closer than 1,320 feet. The closest
drive-in business is located approximately 880 feet from the proposed drive-up window. This
requirement, along with a waiver permitted in section 1320.09 of the City Code, is discussed
previously in this report.
C. Landscaping and Tree Preservation –Section 1325.05 Subd. 1 and 1325.055
A Landscaping Plan was submitted by the applicant for Phase I and is included in Attachment C.
Based on the square footage of the proposed building, the City Code requires 48 caliper inches of
trees be planted. Currently, 22.5 calipers inchesof trees are proposed. Staff has included as
condition of approval that an additional 25.5 caliper inches of trees be included in the Phase I
development.
Landscaping Plan
All of the 15 existing trees on the site will be removed for the Phase I development. It was
determined that none of the trees on the property should be considered significant duetotheir
health, structure, or susceptibility to disease, and the developer is not being required to replace
the caliper inches removed. The following table outlines these numbers.
Caliper InchesNumber of Trees
Proposed Removal* 18915
(100% of existing trees)
New Trees Required by 48-
Code
Total Trees After 22.58
Development
Additional Trees Required 25.5To Be Determined
as Condition of Approval
*None of the existing trees were determined to be significant, therefore no
replacement trees are being required in this case
Trees along Street Frontage –Flexibility Requested
The City Code requires that a minimum of one tree be planted along the right of way for every 40
feet of street frontage. Approximately 187 feet of the Phase I development fronts Red Fox Road
and 375 feet fronts Lexington Avenue. A total of 14 trees along the right of way are required.
Currently, four trees are proposed adjacent to the driveway access off of Red Fox Road. An
additional 10 trees will need to be sited along the Lexington Avenue right of way and this
provision has been added as a condition of approval. However, due to the presence of an
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION –JUNE 19, 20137
underground waterline and other public infrastructure, the developer may be constrained in
locating these required street trees.
Perennials and Shrubberies –Exceeds Requirements
The City Code requires that at least ten percent of the total landscaped area shall be covered with
perennials and/or shrubbery. A total of 412 square feet of plantings is required in Phase I based
on the Code. The applicant has proposed 2,824 square feet, or 68.5% of the total landscape
coverage. It is important to note that if the proposed landscaping met the 25 percent coverage
requirement, a total of 1,456 square feet of plantings would be required. The Master Plan calls
for 75,730 square feet of landscape coverage, of which 7,573 would be required to be planted
with perennials. For the site-wide landscaping plan, the applicant has proposed 16,836 square
feet of plantings, or 22.2% of the overall landscape coverage.
Planting Islands –Flexibility Requested
At least ten percent of a parking area must be occupied by planting islands that are at least 150
square feet in size and have at least one tree. The proposed planting islands meet the size
requirements and all islands include a tree planting. However, only 8.0% of the Phase I parking
area is occupied by planting islands. For the Master Plan, planting islands comprise 9.3% of the
total parking area.
Tree Selection –Meets Requirements
The proposed Linden, Crabapple, and Birch trees are appropriate for urbanized locations and
should grow well in their proposed locations.
D. Lighting –Section 1325.05 Subd. 3 –Meets Requirements
The Phase I lighting plan meets the requirements outlined in Section 1325.05 Subd. 3. Light
poles located around the parking area perimeter and exterior building light will be used to
illuminate the site. All proposed lighting fixtures will be adequately hooded to direct light to the
intended area. The submitted photometric plan does not show any meter readings outside of the
site property lines that exceed Code requirements.
The applicant has proposed including exterior light fixtures on all four sides of the building.
These lights would be placed above each entryway and along the building facades between the
individual bays. The developer is working with an electrical engineer to come upwith final
schematics for the lighting, but they will match the overall design of the building and be
decorative and consistent in style.
E. Parking –Section 1325.06
Location –Flexibility Requested
The City Code requires that off-street parking spaces be located at a minimum 20 feet from the
right of way of any public street. The row of parking spaces on the northern end of the Phase I
development are within approximately 8 feet of the Red Fox Road right of way. Staff is favorable
to this proposal because the parking area will be adequately screened by tree plantings and a
retaining wall.
Off-Street Parking Spaces Required –Flexibility Requested
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION –JUNE 19, 20138
Parking requirements are determined by the specific types of land uses proposed for a site. The
Lexington Station Master Plan includes retail, restaurant, and office uses. The number of parking
spaces required is based on gross sales floor space for retail uses, gross floor area for office uses,
and seating capacity for restaurant uses. In this case, the exact parking requirements are unclear
because the final list of tenants has yet to be determined. Different tenants may require different
floor layouts that would impact the amount of gross retail floor area or the number of restaurant
seats, thus impacting the number of requiredparking stalls.
For the purpose of this application, Staff calculated the gross retail sales space of the
development assuming 20 percent of total retail square footage would be used for non-sales
purposes. This same percentage was used by Staff previously in Planning Case #09-011 when
determining the parking requirements for retail uses in the Arden Plaza Planned Unit
Development. An additional assumption was made that the two proposed restaurant tenants in
the Phase I building would have a total seatingcapacity of 90. The following table outlines the
parking requirement numbers for the development. The employee parking proposed for Phase I
would be located off site on the adjacent properties. As a condition of approval, an agreement
that provides sharedparking between the three properties, as well as shared ingress, egress, and
maintenance of these areas, will be required.
Phase One Parking Requirements
Land Use Total Square Required Stalls
Footage/Seating Capacity
Retail -1 space per 150 SF of10,671 SF 57
gross sales floor space
Restaurant -1 space per 2 seats 90 seats 45
Requirement 102
Proposed* 109
% of Required Spaces 107%
*Includes 33 employee parking spaces, some of which are located on the Phase II and III
sites
Master Plan Parking Requirements
Land Use Total Square Required Stalls
Footage/Seating Capacity
Retail -1 space per 150 SF of 63,599 SF 339
gross sales floor space
Restaurant -1 space per 2 seats 90 seats 45
General Office -1 space per 250 20,000 SF 80
SF
Requirement 464
Proposed* 423
% of Required Spaces 91%
*Includes 80 underground parking stalls
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION –JUNE 19, 20139
Staff believes the proposed number of parking spaces is reasonable. The applicant has given
special consideration to the mix of tenants on the site to support uses with staggered traffic
periods during the day. Additionally, the inclusion of sidewalks, crosswalks, and landscaping in
the design of the parking lot will help facilitate pedestrian mobility between buildings. This in
turn will support the proposed shared parking amongst the properties.
2. Design Standards –Section 1325.05 Subd. 8
The building proposed for Phase I was evaluated based on the additional design standards for the
B3 District included in the City Code. While all future phases of the development will also have
to meet these design standards, only Phase I is currently under review for Final PUD approval.
Phase II and III will require a similar evaluation before the Planning Commission and City
Council.
Building Materials –Exceeds Requirements
The City Code requires that at least 75 percent of the exterior building materials must be of brick,
stone, decorative concrete plank, or transparent glass. Permitted trim materials include metal,
wood, and EIFS. Nearly the entire exterior of the proposed building is comprised of brick and
transparent glass. Rough face cast stone is used as a trim material at the base of the building and
along the roof line. A standing seam metal roof is proposed at the northern and southern end of
the building.
Building Design –Flexibility Requested
The building design section of the B3 District design standards includes several provisions, most
of which are met by the proposal. At least 50 percent of the largest building on each site is
required to be constructed at the front setback line. In this case, the applicant has asked for
flexibilityto allow for the Phase I building to be situated closer to the front property line than
setback regulations would normally permit. The proposed design includes façade treatment on all
four sides of the building and the building façades are broken up into regular, smaller increments
using windows, doors, and light fixtures. Awnings have been included at all entryways except the
entrance doorways for the two central tenants. The applicant did not include awnings above these
entryways for aesthetic reasons.
The City Council and Planning Commission have previously expressed concern about the design
of the eastern side of the building. While traditionally this is where the primary building entrance
would be located, the building is oriented towards the interior of the site and the back of the
building faces Lexington Avenue. Staff has worked with the developer to ensure that this side of
the building is well designed. Awnings and light fixtures have been included to break up the
façade. Landscaping in the adjacent right of way will help partially screen the building.
Additionally, the developer has proposed constructing the façade entirely with brick and all
service doors will be painted to match the color of the brick used.
Commercial Façade Transparency –Exceeds Requirements
For commercial buildings, at least 50 percent of the first level façade that includes the primary
store entrances must be made of transparent windows and doors. Approximately 54 percent of
the proposed building’s first level façade will be transparent. At least 20 percent of the remaining
sides that are visible to the public must be window coverage, half of which may be spandrel
glass. The applicant has proposed approximately 38 percent transparent window coverage for the
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION –JUNE 19, 201310
northern and southern facades, and 23 percent transparent window coverage for the eastern
building façade. None of the proposed window coverage would be tinted, reflective, or frosted.
The developer has indicated that depending on the needs of the tenants located in the northern,
central, and southern bays of the building, a certain percentage of the window coverage on the
eastern, northern, and southern sides of the building may need to be non-transparent. The
Planning Commission should determine how much non-transparent window coverage would be
permitted on these three sides of the building and include this requirement as a condition of
approval.
Site Furnishing and Seating Areas –Meets Requirements
Benches and decorative plantings are required near the primary entrance of all buildings.
Restaurants must provide for an outdoor seating area. The applicant has proposed a large public
sidewalk area, measuring from 15 to 20 feet in width, which would wrap around the western and
southern sides of the building. Included in this space would be benches, decorative plantings,
bicycle parking stands, and outdoor seating for the two restaurant tenants.
Screening –Flexibility Requested
The City Code requires that trash equipment and containers be fully enclosed and integrated into
the architecture of the building. The applicant was unable to accommodate the building’s trash
facilities in the interior of the building and has proposed to locate an exterior trash enclosure in
the northeast corner of the site. This facility would be fully enclosed and would be constructed
with brick and rough cast stone to match the exterior materials used for the principal building. A
proposed retaining wall along the northern and eastern sides of the northeastern corner of the
property would completely screen the structure from vehicles and pedestrians. Staff is generally
favorable to this approach. By removing the trash facilities from the interior of the building, the
developer will have more leeway in ensuring that the eastern side of the building facing
Lexington Avenue is well designed and aesthetically appealing.
Pedestrian and Bicycle Circulation –Meets Requirements
Sites must be designed to accommodate the safe mobility of pedestrians and bicyclists. The
applicant has proposed a pedestrian mobility plan that provides sidewalks linking the entrances
of the building to the public sidewalk network and which includes striping where pedestrians
must cross parking areas. A total of four bicycle stands are located near the building entrances.
The four stands should be able to accommodate up to eight bicycles.
3. Traffic Study
A traffic study was completed by the SRF Consulting Group for the Lexington Station project.
The main objectives of the study were to review existing operations within the study area,
evaluate the traffic impacts to the adjacent roadway network, and to recommend any necessary
improvements to accommodate the proposed development. The study evaluated all three phases
of the development to help illustrate the timeframe in which improvements may be necessary.
To evaluate the existing traffic operations, SRF gathered data for the intersections at I-694 and
Lexington Avenue; Red Fox Road and Lexington Avenue; Target Service Road and Lexington
Avenue; and Grey Fox Road and Lexington Avenue. Based on an analysis of current conditions,
it was determined that all intersections are operating at an acceptable Level of Service (LOS) C
or better during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION –JUNE 19, 201311
Two access scenarios were reviewed for the Lexington Station development. Scenario A utilizes
the existing shared access located along Lexington Avenue approximately 350 feet south of Red
Fox Road. Scenario B includes the construction of a west approach at the Lexington
Avenue/Target Service Road intersection to serve as the development’s access along Lexington
Avenue. The applicant has proposed maintaining Scenario A during Phase I and Phase II, and
implementing Scenario B for Phase III.
The results of the Phase I build operations analysis indicate that all study intersections are
expected to operate at an overall acceptable LOS C or better. The study does indicate that the
northbound queues at the Lexington Avenue/Red Fox Road intersection are expected to extend
beyond the existing shared access under Scenario A during the p.m. peak hour. However, this is
considered more of a safety issue rather than an operational issue. The City and Ramsey County
will monitor this access driveway and consider modification, if necessary.
The results of the Phase II build operations analysis also indicate that all study intersections are
expected to operate at an acceptable overall LOS C or better. The queuing issue along Lexington
Avenue identified for Phase I is expected to continue, but is not expected to increase significantly
with the build-out of Phase II.
For Phase III, the analysis was completed under Scenario B access conditions. The results of the
build operations analysis show that all study intersections are expected to operate at an
acceptable overall LOS D or better, indicating an increase in intersection delay from the previous
phases. The study reports that LOS D is still generally considered acceptable by drivers in the
Twin Cities metropolitan area. Eastbound queues at the Lexington Avenue/Red Fox Road
intersection are expected to block the east access along Red Fox Road approximately 20 percent
of the p.m. peak hour. The study concludes that construction of a right-turn lane at the Lexington
Avenue/Red Fox Road intersection is warranted to alleviate this issue.
Based on the Phase III traffic forecasts, SRF determined there would not be sufficient volume to
meet the traffic signal warrant criteria at the Lexington Avenue/Target Service Road intersection.
However, the study states that if a signal were to be installed, there would likely be sufficient
diversion to warrant the signal and provide relief to the Lexington Avenue/Red Fox Road
intersection.
4. Sign Code
The applicant has submitted a proposal for a monument sign and wall signage for the site. Sign
plans for the individual tenants on the property are not being considered at this time.
A. Monument Signage –FlexibilityRequested
The site is located in Sign District 5. Each property is allowed one monument sign measuring up
to 100 square feet in area and not exceeding 16 feet in height. Since the Phase I property fronts
two public streets, an additional freestanding sign is permitted on the second adjacent street. This
second sign is allowed a sign copy area of 50 square feet. The applicant has proposed installing
one monument sign on Lexington Avenue with a height of 22’ –9 ½” and an area of
approximately 135 square feet. No freestanding signage is proposed for Red Fox Road. The
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION –JUNE 19, 201312
Planning Commission should make a determination on whether the proposed monument sign is
acceptable and include a condition restricting the dimensions of this sign, if necessary.
The Sign Code requires that freestanding signs be located at least five feet from any property
line. The proposed Lexington Avenue monument sign would sit directly on the eastern property
line. Staff believes this request is reasonable given the unusually wide right of way separating
Lexington Avenue from the site’s front property line.
In Sign District 5, monument signs must have a solid base of brick or rock-faced block. The
material of the base must also extend at least one-half way up the sides of the sign face. The
proposed monument sign would sit on rough face cast stone and brick would extend up the entire
length of one side of the sign. The side of the sign facing Lexington Avenue does not include
brick. Staff supports this request because the sign is set backa significant distance from
Lexington Avenue and including brick on this side of the sign could obscure the advertising.
Sign District 5 Permitted Proposed
FREESTANDING
Type Monument Monument
Max Area (Sign 1) 100 SF 135 SF (approximate)
Max Area (Sign 2) 50 SF -
Max Height 16’ 22’ –9 ½”
Lighting (a) E/I/B Internal
(a) E = external, I = internal, B = backlit
B. Wall Signage –Meets Requirements
Properties in Sign District 5 are permitted 80 square feet of wall signage. The applicant has
proposed a total of 60 square feet of wall signage to be placed on the retaining wall located in the
northeastern corner of the property. These signs would be comprised of individual cut metal
letters and would help brand the project as the Lexington Station development.
Sign District 5 Permitted Proposed
WALL
Sign Copy Area 80 SF 60 SF
Max Height None -
Lighting (a) E/I/B None
(a) E = external, I = internal, B = backlit
Each tenant will be permitted up to 80 square feet of wall signage. The B3 District design
standards require that business signs must be architecturally compatible with the style,
composition, materials, colors, and details of the building and should be an integral part of the
building.
5. Additional Review
A. Building Official, Lake Johanna Fire Marshal, and City Engineer
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION –JUNE 19, 201313
The Building Official did not have any comments on the project. A letter dated April 8, 2013,
from the Lake Johanna Fire Marshal is included in Attachment E. The Assistant City Engineer
reviewed the proposal and provided comments in a memo dated June 6, 2013 (Attachment E).
B. Ramsey County Review
Ramsey County submitted their comments in the letter dated May 17, 2013 (Attachment E). The
County considers the existing driveway access on Lexington Avenue that will serve the Phase I
and Phase II development as a temporary access point. The proposed new access driveway at the
southern end of the site is approved as the sole permanent access off of Lexington Avenue.
Prior to granting approval for the southerly access, the property owner must close the existing
access driveway on Lexington Avenue. Approval will also be conditioned on the new access
aligning with the Target Service Road, the construction of a right turn lane on LexingtonAvenue,
and the installation of necessary traffic controls at the intersection as determined by a traffic
study. Ramsey County has stated that any accommodations necessary to provide safe access will
not be funded by the County.
The County has indicated a need for a right turn lane on Red Fox Road to turn southbound onto
Lexington Avenue as the site develops. The City of Shoreview has plans to make improvements
to Red Fox Road east of Lexington Avenue and the design of this right turn lane should be
coordinated closely with Shoreview’s plans. The applicant has adjusted their plans to
accommodate this future right-of-way need.
Community Development Intern Bachler provided the Findings of Fact for review:
1.The applicant is requesting approval of a MasterPUD, Final PUD for Phase I, and a
Preliminary Plat for the Lexington Station redevelopment site.
2.The PUD process allows for flexibility within the City’s regulations through a negotiated
process with a developer.
3.The Lexington Station property is located in the B-3 Service Business District.
4.The proposed development is a permitted use in the B-3 District.
5.The City has adopted design standards for the B-3 District within the Zoning Code.
6.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.
7.The Master PUD and Final PUD for Phase I are in substantial conformance with the
City’s Comprehensive Plan.
8.Where the plan is not in conformance withthe 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.
9.The application is not anticipated to create a negative impact on the immediate area or the
community as a whole.
Community Development Intern Bachler stated based on the submitted plans and findings of fact,
Staff recommends approval of Planning Case 13-003 for a Master PUD, a Final PUD for Phase I,
and a Preliminary Plat at 3833 Lexington Avenue. Staff recommends the following twenty-four
conditions be included with the approval:
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION –JUNE 19, 201314
1.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.
2.The applicant shall obtain a building permit within one year of the Final PUD approval
for Phase I or the approval shall expire unless extendedby the City Council prior to the
approval’s expiration date. Extension requests must be submitted in writing to the City at
least 45 days prior to the expiration date.
3.The applicant shall apply for a Final PUD of Phase II within five years and Phase III
within ten years of the Master PUD approval or the approval shall expire unless extended
by the City Council prior to the approval’s expiration date. Extension requests must be
submitted in writing to the City at least 45 days prior to the expiration date.
4.The applicant shall submit a financial surety in the amount of 125 percent of the
estimated costs of Phase I site improvements including grading, utilities, and paving,
prior to the issuance of a grading and erosion control permit. The financial surety shall be
in the form of a letter of credit issued by a FDIC-insured Minnesota bank, and be in a
form acceptable to the City. The purpose of the letter of credit is to ensure that site
improvements are completed in the event that the developer defaults on the Development
Agreement.
5.The applicant shall submit a cash escrow in the amount of 25 percent of the estimated
costs of Phase I site improvements including grading, utilities, and paving, prior to the
issuance of a grading and erosion control permit. The escrow will be used for City costs
related to review, approval, and inspection of site improvements or any costs incurred by
the City in the event of a developer default.
6.The applicant shall submit a financial surety in the amount of 125 percent of the
estimated costs of Phase I landscaping prior to the issuance of a grading and erosion
control permit. The financial surety shall be in the form of a letter of credit issued by a
FDIC-insured Minnesota bank. The purpose of the letter of creditis to ensure that
landscaping is completed in the event that the developer defaults on the Development
Agreement. The City will hold the letter of credit for two years after the installation of
landscaping. The letter of credit should not expire during the two-year period.
7.The applicant shall submit a cash escrow in the amount of 25 percent of the estimated
costs of Phase I landscaping prior to the issuance of a grading and erosion control permit.
The escrow will be held by the City for two years after installation of landscaping and
used for City costs related to review, approval, and inspection of landscaping, or
developer default.
8.The applicant shall submit a cash escrow in the amount of $7,350.00 for grading and
erosion control prior to the issuance of a grading and erosion control permit. The escrow
will be used for City costs related to review, approval, and inspection of grading and
erosion control, or developer default.
9.The City shall review and approve the Final Plat. The applicant shall file the Final Plat
with Ramsey County prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
10.Prior to the issuance of a grading and erosion control permit, the applicant shall provide
an easement on the south side of Red Fox Road for the purpose of placing a public
sidewalk and future right turn lane, as reflected on the Plans, subject to the approval of
the City Engineer.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION –JUNE 19, 201315
11.Final grading, drainage, utility, and site plans shall be subject to approval by the Public
Works Director, City Engineer, and City Planner prior to the issuance of a grading and
erosion control permit.
12.The plans shall be subject to Fire Marshall and Ramsey County Sheriff approval prior to
the issuance of a building permit.
13.A lighting and photometric plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City and the
Ramsey County Sheriff prior to issuance of a building permit.
14.Upon completion of grading and utility work on the site, a grading asbuilt and utility
asbuilt shall be provided to the City for review.
15.The applicant shall consult with the County and the City of Shoreview regarding sidewalk
placement to ensure that the sidewalk placement will align with the Lexington Avenue
and Red Fox Road intersection changes planned for the future.
16.Prior to the approval of any Final PUD for future development phases, the City shall
evaluate the existing parking lot circulation and may require alterations if deemed
warranted by the City Engineer.
17.Prior to the approval of any Final PUD for future development phases, the City shall
evaluate parking needs and requirements based on the proposed mix of the retail,
restaurant, and office uses and the performance of parking in previous phases.
18.All of the parking stalls located on the three lots shall be shared. The form of agreements
that provide shared parking in perpetuity between the properties at 3833 Lexington
Avenue, 3771 Lexington Avenue, and 1120 Red Fox Road, as well as shared ingress,
egress, and maintenance of these areas, shall be reviewed and approved bythe City.
Executed copies of shared parking agreements shall be provided to the City prior to the
issuance of a building permit.
19.Approval of Phase III shall be contingent on the closure of the existing access on
Lexington Avenue and the constructionof the southerly access across from the Target
Service Road.
20.The applicant shall include an additional 25.5 caliper inches of trees on-site for the Phase
I development or if tree planting on-site is not practical, a fee in lieu thereof may be paid
for the trees required. The fee amount shall be the cost of materials and installation of
trees, plus ten percent, and shall be provided by the applicant and approved by the City.
21.The Developer shall provide a minimum of one tree every 40 feet along the Lexington
Avenue right-of-way. These plantings may not be counted towards the additional tree
plantings required for Phase I as stated in Condition number 20. The Developer shall
coordinate these plantings with Ramsey County and all relevant utility companies with
infrastructure located in the right-of-way.
22.Each tenant for the Phase I building shall be limited to no more than eighty square feet of
total wall signage. Wall signage shall not be transferable between tenants. Each sign shall
require a separate sign permit prior to installation per the requirements of the Sign Code
and design standards.
23.A development agreement shall be prepared by the City Attorney and subject to City
Council approval. The agreement shall be executed prior to the issuance of a grading and
erosion control permit.
24.The applicant shall conform to all other City regulations.
Community Development Intern Bachler reviewed the options available to the Planning
Commission on this matter:
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION –JUNE 19, 201316
1.Recommend Approval with Conditions
2.Recommend Approval as Submitted
3.Recommend Denial
4.Table
Chair Larson openedthe floor to Commissioner comments.
Commissioner Holewa asked if the auxiliary trash building would have a roof.
Community Development Intern Bachler stated this buildingwould have a roof.
Commissioner Holewa questioned if the City had anyidea how the County would be using their
right-of-way along Lexington Avenue.
Community Development Intern Bachler commented that this was unknown at this time.
Chair Larson discussed the landscape coverage within Phase I. He indicated the landscape
coverage would sit at 7.1% for two to five years prior to the additional phases beingcompleted.
This was considerably below the typical landscaping standards.
Community Development Intern Bachler stated this was the case.
Chair Larson requested a more substantial plant be chosen to hedge the property along County
Road E as the hydrangeas would not provide coverage through the winter months.
Commissioner Holewa agreed with this recommendation and encouraged the applicant to use a
more diverse selection of native shrubs and grasses.
Chair Larson stated 14 trees were required to be planted along the street frontage for Phase I of
the development. He recommended several of the overstory trees be planted along Lexington
Avenue.
Community Development Intern Bachler stated a large watermain was located along Lexington
Avenue that would have to be avoided. This could be discussed between the Developer, the
County, and the City Engineer.
Nick Roberts, 1851 Berkley Road, explained he was the Developer. He indicated the patio area
would have decorative plantings and should be added into the landscape coverage percentage.
Mr. Roberts explained he was proposing to use high quality materials on the development and he
appreciated the Commission’s comments regarding tree placement and landscaping species.
Community Development Intern Bachler stated the decorative plantingareas were included in the
percentage of landscaping.
Chair Larson questioned if the Developer was willing to relocate the boulevard trees. He
recommended the Phase I and Phase II trees be planted at the same time.
Mr. Roberts agreed with this recommendation and stated he was in favor of moving the trees.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION –JUNE 19, 201317
Chair Larson supported the location of the trash enclosure. He questioned what building
materials would be used for the roof on the auxiliary trash enclosure.
Mr. Roberts was proposing to have a green roof.
Commissioner Holewa encouraged the Developer to select new tree species to avoid
contamination by the Japanese beetle. He explained the beetle was currently damaging Linden
and Birch trees throughout the County.
Commissioner Hames discussed the Phase I east elevation of the building. She supported the
7.1%landscape coverage given the fact the only 26% percent of the lot for Phase I would be
covered with building, when 40% was allowed. She appreciated the shrub and flowering plant
selectionsproposed by the Developerand asked if the plantings would be above or below grade.
Mr. Roberts indicated the plants would be above the drive-thru lane elevation.
Commissioner Holewa provided comment on the monument sign. He indicated it would be
difficult to read the small business name signs for passing traffic.
Chair Larson asked what size sign each tenant would be allowed on the building or monument
sign.
Community Development Intern Bachler commented each tenant would be allowed to have 80
square feet of totalwallsignageon the building.
Chair Larson recommended the sign approval be deferred at this time until a final sign plan was
brought to the City by the Developer.
Community Development Intern Bachler agreed with this suggestion stating the PUD could be
amended once the sign needs were finalized.
Chair Larson further reviewed the Phase I Lexington Avenue façade. He stated he was pleased
with the proposed color of the doors and canopies. He suggested the brick pilasters be made
another color to add further articulation to this elevation of the building. He recommended the
Developer have the light fixture selections completed in time for the Council meeting.
Commissioner Thompson requested the drive-thru be masked further with landscaping. She then
discussed the traffic study and asked if the Developer had any concerns.
Mr. Roberts had no concerns at this time.
Commissioner Holewa reiterated that the traffic study did not include the increased traffic from
Trader Joe’s. For this reason, he anticipated congestion in this area after the proposed
development was completed.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION –JUNE 19, 201318
Community Development Intern Bachler commented Shoreview is currentlymodifying their side
of Red FoxRoad. He stated existing traffic levels were steady and may need to be addressed
with the County in the future.
Community Development Director Hutmacher stated the plat did include a right turn lane
easement from Red Fox Road moving onto Lexington Avenue. This would assist traffic in
flowing more smoothly through the area.
Commissioner Stodola appreciated the sidewalks included within the entire development. She
suggested the sidewalks be connected to adjacent parcels.
Community Development Director Hutmacher stated this was an excellent suggestion and noted
the City would work to make connections in the future. She commented the proposed sidewalks
would increasewalk-ability for those working in the area wanting to access the development.
Councilmember McClung indicated the proposed sidewalks were a great start andwould act as a
catalyst for adjacent property owners.
Mr. Roberts reviewed a materials board with the Commission.
Chair Larson opened the public hearing at 7:53 p.m.
Chair Larson invited anyone for or against the application to come forward and make comment.
There being no comment Chair Larson closed the public hearing at 7:53 p.m.
Commissioner Holewamoved and Commissioner Scottseconded a motion to recommend
approval of Planning Case 13-003for a Master PUD, a Final PUD for Phase I, and a
Preliminary Plat at 3833 Lexington Avenue based on the findingsof fact and the submitted
plans, as amended by the 24conditions in the June 19,2013, report to the Planning
Commission, deferring the lighting and sign plan until a comprehensive plan was
submitted by the Developer. The motion carried unanimously (6-0).
COMMENTS AND REPORTS
None.
ADJOURN
Commissioner Holewamoved, seconded by Commissioner Hames,to adjourn the June 19,
2013, Planning Commission Meeting at 7:56p.m. The motion carried unanimously (6-0).