Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-06-13 PC Minutes Approved: December 4, 2013 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 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 6:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Present were: Chair Clayton Larson, Commissioners Brent Bartel, Angela Hames, Andrew Holewa, Roberta Thompson, and Clayton Zimmerman. Absent: Commissioners Sam Scott and Janet Stodola (Alternate). Also present were: City Planner Ryan Streff; Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler; Councilmember Dave McClung; and Community Development Director Jill Hutmacher. APPROVAL OF AGENDA NOVEMBER 6, 2013 Chair Larson stated the agenda will stand as published. APPROVAL OF MINUTES None. PLANNING CASES A.Planning Case 13-018; Site Plan Review; Sign Standard Adjustment; 4105 Lexington Avenue North Not a Public Hearing City Planner Streff stated the applicant has requested a Site Plan Review for a Sign Standard Adjustment that would allow for a deviation from the Sign Code to increase the amount of wall signage on the Gradient Financial Building to one hundred and twenty-six (126) square feet. City Planner Streff explained Gradient Financial has expressed concerns about the visibility of their corporate headquarters located at the corner of Lexington Avenue and County Road F. The applicant has stated that the sixty (60) square feet of wall signage that is allowed by the Code for Sign District 6 is not proportionately adequate for a structure of this size and corner lot location ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION November 6, 20132 along two main roadways. By increasing the amount of wall signage the applicant is hoping to improve the overall appearance of the building while increasing its visibility to the traveling public. In order to address this concern, Gradient Financial is proposing to increase the amount of permitted wall signage by sixty-six (66) square feet for a total of one hundred and twenty-six (126) square feet. At this time the applicant is proposing one (1) wall sign that would measure approximately twenty-one (21) feet by six (6) feet, an area of one hundred and twenty-six (126) square feet. The proposed sign would be positioned on the northeast side of the building being primarily visible by traffic traveling north on Lexington Avenue. City Planner Streff stated the proposed non-illuminated wall sign would be designed with reverse channel letters constructed with aluminum and painted dark bronze. Fourteen (14) individual letters, each being two (2) feet in height, and individuallyfastened to the exterior of the building. In addition to the lettering stated above, a sign measuring six (6) feet wide by six (6) feet in height would create Grad and would be installed a Site Data Future Land Use Plan: I/O Light Industrial and Office Existing Land Use: Office Zoning: I-1 Limited Industrial District Size: 5.17 acres Topography: Fairly Flat City Planner Streff reviewed the surrounding area, the plan evaluation and the existing signage. City Planner Streff provided the Findings of Fact for review: 1.The property is located in the I-1 Limited Industrial District. 2.The property is located in Sign District 6 3.In Sign District 6, wall signage up to sixty (60) square feet and freestanding signage up to forty-five (45) square feet is permitted. 4.Gradient Financial is proposing one (1) wall sign on the northeast corner of the building. 5.The proposed signs would measure approximately twenty-one (21) feet by six (6) feet, an area of 126 square feet. 6.The proposed sign would display the Gradient logo and the text for Gradient Center with non-illuminated reverse channel letters. 7.The proposed sign is made from high quality materials that will accent the existing building façade. 8.Section 1260 of the Sign Code permits deviation from the Sign Code through the Site Plan Review process. 9.The proposed sign at 126 square feet is proportionate to the size of the principle structure. 10.The sign adjustment will not result in a sign that is inconsistent with the purpose I-1 Limited Industrial District. 11.Increasing the amount of wall signage would not have a negative impact on adjacent properties or the City as a whole. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION November 6, 20133 City Planner Streff stated based on the findings of fact and submitted plans, staff recommends approval of Planning Case 13-018 for a Sign Standard Adjustment under the Site Plan Review process. Staff recommends the following four (4) conditions be included with the approval: 1.That 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.That one (1) wall sign up to 126 square feet in size shall be permitted. No additional wall signage shall be allowed. 3.That the wall sign shall be comprised of individual cut letters and shall not extend more than twelve (12) inches from the wall they are attached to. 4.That the applicant shall apply for a sign permit prior to the installation of the sign. City Planner Streff reviewed the options available to the Planning Commission on this matter: 1.Recommend Approval with Conditions. 2.Recommend Approval as Submitted. 3.Recommend Denial. 4.Table. Chair Larson opened the floor to Commissioner comments. Chuck Lucius, Gradient Financial building owner, explained the County was widening Lexington Avenue and County Road F. He discussed how these improvements would impact his property. He explained that the two existing freestanding signs would need to be relocated. Commissioner Thompson questioned where the address numbers for this building would be located. Mr. Lucius pointed out the location of the address numbers for the building. Commissioner Hames commented she drove through the property and approved of the modern design and proposed sign improvements. She recommended the sign code be reviewed by the Commission. Commissioner Zimmerman agreed the building exterior had been enhanced and approved of the proposed sign. Commissioner Holewa moved and Commissioner Thompson seconded a motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 13-018 for a Sign Standard Adjustment at 4105 Lexington Avenue North based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, as amended by the four (4) conditions in the November 6, 2013, report to the Planning Commission. Commissioner Thompson supported the proposed sign design and size given the location of the building with respect to Lexington Avenue and County Road F. The motion carried unanimously (6-0). ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION November 6, 20134 B.Planning Case 13-019; Site Plan Review; Accessory Structure; 4105 Lexington Avenue North Not a Public Hearing City Planner Streff stated the applicant has requested a Site Plan Review for a Permanent Accessory Structure in order to construct a 1,800 square foot accessory structure at the property located at 4105 Lexington Avenue. Gradient Financial owns the property located at 4105 Lexington Avenue, which is zoned I-1 Limited Industrial District. The property is generally positioned north of County Road F, south of Boston Scientific, east of Hamline Avenue and west of Lexington Avenue. The applicant is proposing a 1,800 square to be located on the property and positioned in the northwest corner of the lot. The purpose of the building is for storage of the equipment necessary for the maintenance of the property. City Planner Streff stated the applicant has indicated the proposed structure would be constructed on a floating slab and built with a wooden re would have fourteen (14) foot side walls. A flat rubber roof system is being proposed on the accessory structure to mimic the roof of the principle building. City Planner Streff explained a product that has the texture and finished appearance of real brick is being proposed as the exterior finish of the structure. This exterior product is made using a fiber cement cladding solution and constructed in panels that are eighteen (18) inches wide by six (6) feet in length. City Planner Streff noted Gradient Financial is also proposing to build a new trash enclosure adjacent to the proposed accessory structure. The enclosure would be approximately 180 square constructed of masonry units with a rock face and metal gates to conceal the dumpsters. The existing trash enclosure would then be removed from the east side of the principle building. Site Data Future Land Use Plan: I/O Light Industrial and Office Existing Land Use: Office Zoning: I-1 Limited Industrial District Size: 5.17 acres Topography: Fairly Flat City Planner Streff reviewed the surrounding area and Plan Evaluation. City Planner Streff provided the Findings of Fact for review: 1.Permanent accessory structures within this district are subject to a Site Plan Review and Council approval. 2. The property is located in the I-1 Limited Industrial District. 3. The proposed accessory structure would be located in the northwest corner of the lot. 4. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION November 6, 20135 5. A flat rubber roof is being proposed to mimic the principle building on the property. 6. The purpose of the building is for storage of the equipment necessary for the maintenance of the property. 7. The applicant has proposed an exterior finish that is constructed with fiber cement to replicate a brick appearance. 8. The structure will not result in a use that is inconsistent with the purpose or intent of the Zoning Code or the I-1 Limited Industrial District. 9. The placement of an accessory structure in the proposed location should not have a negative impact on adjacent properties or the City as a whole. City Planner Streff stated based on the submitted plans and findings of fact, staff recommends approval of Planning Case 13-019 for a Permanent Accessory Structure under the Site Plan Review process. Staff recommends the following four (4) conditions be included with the approval: 1.That 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.That the exterior of the accessory structure be constructed with a material that is compatible to the principle building and approved by the City Planner before a building permit is issued. 3.That a Grading and Erosion Control Permit shall be obtained by the applicant and approved by the City before a Building Permit is issued. 4.That the applicant shall apply for a building permit prior to any construction. City Planner Streff reviewed the options available to the Planning Commission on this matter: 1.Recommend Approval with Conditions. 2.Recommend Approval as Submitted. 3.Recommend Denial. 4.Table. Chair Larson opened the floor to Commissioner comments. Commissioner Zimmerman anticipated the proposed building would not be visible from County Road F. He questioned if the siding material had to be adjusted if the building would not be seen except by those in the building. Chair Larson discussed the location of the accessory structure and noted the proposed building materials would not match the existing building. Nate Cote, CoBeck Construction, explained that the proposed exterior material would be painted to match the principle structure. He stated the proposed exterior material was superior in design when compared to other products. He reported the brick on the main building was non-standard in size and was proving difficult to find. Chair Larson questioned if staff objected to the proposed exterior color or material. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION November 6, 20136 City Planner Streff stated the exterior material was a cement board and the appearance was not compatible with the existing structure. Commissioner Hames suggested the accessory structure building materials be adapted and be trimmed in bronze to more closely match the principle structure. Chair Larson was comfortable with the condition recommended by staff requiring the exterior of the accessory structure be constructed with a material that is compatible to the principle building and be approved by the City Planner before a building permit was issued. The Commission was in agreement. Chuck Lucius, Gradient Financial building owner, questioned if the accessory structure could be painted brown as this would allow it to blend in with the surroundings. Chair Larson indicated the structure would have to be compatible with the main building and its color scheme. He encouraged Mr. Lucius to speak further with staff regarding the exterior building materials. Commissioner Holewa moved and Commissioner Zimmerman seconded a motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 13-019 for an Accessory Structure at 4105 Lexington Avenue North based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, as amended by the four (4) conditions in the November 6, 2013, report to the Planning Commission. The motion carried unanimously (6-0). C.Planning Case 13-007; Zoning Code Amendment; B-2 & B-3 Design Standards Public Hearing Community Development Intern Bachler stated in October 2008, the City Council accepted the Guiding Plan for the B-2 District. The plan included design guidelines for development in the B- 2 District and proposed standards for building and site design, façade treatment, pedestrian circulation, and parking. The City Council subsequently approved ordinance amendments that adapted the design guidelines for the Zoning Code. The guidelines now apply to all properties in both the B-2 and B-3 Districts. Since their adoption, four development projects have been evaluated based on these design standards: Planning Case 11- Planning Case 11-16: Arden Plaza PUD Amendment (Walgreens Pharmacy) Planning Case 12-19: 1201 County Road E Master PUD Planning Case 13-04: Lexington Station Master PUD Community Development Intern Bachler commented that through the process of reviewing these developments, the City has had the opportunity to identify sections in the design standards that need adjustments or additions. It is important to strike a balance between having design standards that are either too prescriptive or too permissive. When cities put in place strict standards, it can have the effect of deterring development. On the other hand, relaxed standards can result in completed revisions to help clarify certain design requirements and to provide developers with ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION November 6, 20137 more flexibility in the development review process. The updated standards also ensure that future development in the B-2 and B-3 Districts will continue to be well designed. It was noted the Planning Commission previously discussed the proposed amendments at the May 8, 2013, meeting. A draft was also reviewed by the City Council at a work session on October 21, 2013. Comments from these two meetings have been incorporated into the revised ordinance. Community Development Intern Bachler reviewed the summary of proposed Ordinance Amendments. Community Development Intern Bachler provided the Findings of Fact for review: 1. The City Council accepted the Guiding Plan for the B-2 District on October 27, 2008. 2. The City Council adopted design standards in Section 1325.05 of the Zoning Code on November 24, 2008, that was in substantial conformance with the Guiding Plan for the B-2 District. 3. The City Council amended Section 1325.05 Subd. 8 of the Zoning Code on December 8, 2008, to apply the B-2 Design Standards to the B-3 Service Business District. 4. The proposed amendments would provide developers with more clarity in the development review process and ensure that development in the B-2 and B-3 Districts continues to be well-designed. 5. The proposed amendments are in substantial conformance with the Guiding Plan for the B-2 District. 6. The proposed amendments are in substantial conformance with the Purpose and Intent of Section 1325.05 Subd. 8 of the Zoning Code, Additional Design Standards for New Development, Redevelopment, and Modifications to Existing Site in the B-2 and B-3 Districts. Community Development Intern Bachler stated based on the findings of fact, staff recommends approval of Ordinance Number 2013-012. If the Planning Commission wishes to make changes to the Ordinance, those changes can be included with a motion to approve. Community Development Intern Bachler reviewed the options available to the Planning Commission on this matter: 1.Recommend Approval as Submitted. 2.Recommend Approval with Changes. 3.Recommend Denial. 4.Table. Chair Larson opened the floor to Commissioner comments. Commissioner Holewa recommended that graphic examples of the exterior building materials be attached to the Zoning Code. Community Development Intern Bachler indicated that staff was investigating how to create an appendix to the Zoning Code that would include these graphics. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION November 6, 20138 Commissioner Hames asked why reflective glass was an undesirable building material. Community Development Intern Bachler stated this was done for safety purposes. Chair Larson discussed the use of tilt up brick and concrete panels. He asked if metal awnings were allowed. Community Development Intern Bachler explained metal awnings would be permitted, while fiberglass and plastic were prohibited. Chair Larson recommended the term section of the Ordinance. Commissioner Hames thanked staff for the thorough report and for making the proposed amendments to the design standards. Chair Larson inquired if outdoor seating should be required for all restaurants in the B-2 and B-3 zoning district. Community Development Intern Bachler stated this question was also raised by the City Council and there was some discussion as to whether this requirement should be removed. Commissioner Holewa asked if outdoor seating areas would be designated as non-smoking areas. Chair Larson commented these areas would have to be designated as non-smoking if within 25 feet of the main entrance. He indicated this decision would ultimately have to be decided by the property owner. Chair Larson opened the public hearing at 7:44 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 7:45 p.m. Commissioner Holewa moved and Commissioner Zimmerman seconded a motion to recommend approval of Ordinance Number 2013-012 for amendments to Section 1325.05, Subd. 8 of the Zoning Code regarding Additional Design Standards for New Development, Redevelopment and Modifications to Existing Sites in the B-2 and B-3 Districts. The motion carried unanimously (6-0). UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS None. REPORTS ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION November 6, 20139 A.Report from the City Council City Planner Streff updated the Planning Commission on City Council activities from their October 28, 2013, meeting including approval of Planning Case 13-016 for a variance at 1226 Ingerson Road. The Planning Commission recommended approval (5-1, Holewa) of this case at their October 9, 2013, meeting. The City Council also reviewed Planning Case 13-013 for a conditional use permit for Bethel University in order to allow higher education as the principal use of the property at 2 Pine Tree Drive. The City Council voted to table the case to allow for additional discussion at a future Council meeting. The Planning Commission reviewed this request at their October 9, 2013, meeting and recommended approval (6-0). B.TCAAP Update Community Development Director Hutmacher stated Ramsey County received notice that the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have approved the Quality Assurance Project Plan. This means that below-grade remediation work can begin in the 30 acres that are subject to the lease agreement with the federal government. Community Development Director Hutmacher indicated in an effort to increase involvement of businesses and young professionals in the master planning process, staff is working with the St. Paul Chamber of Commerce to schedule a master planning eve November. The event will be very similar, in terms of information presented and the land use exercise, to the September 17, 2013, TCAAP open house. Depending on the outcome of the Land -site master planning activities may be scheduled at major local employers in winter/spring 2014. Community Development Director Hutmacher reported Kimley-Horn is working on analysis and pre-design work for the County Road H and Highway 96 intersections with I-35W related to the contract amendment requested by Ramsey County. City and County staff and consultants have met to discuss design options and their advantages and challenges related to traffic capacity, cost, MnDOT requirements, and development needs. The consultants are refining the options based on staff input prior to presentation to MnDOT and FHWA for further comment. Community Development Director Hutmacher stated an Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) is a form of environmental documentation through Minnesota State Rules that evaluates development scenarios for an entire geographical area rather than a specific project. An AUAR process is formally initiated by Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) order, which establishes the study area and scenarios to be addressed, and officially starts the AUAR process. It was noted the City of Arden Hills is the RGU for the TCAAP Development. Two scenarios have been developed for evaluation in the AUAR: 1.A scenario that is consistent with the approved Comprehensive Plan. Because the existing TCAAP zoning offers more detail than the Comprehensive Plan, using zoning regulations is an acceptable alternative. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION November 6, 201310 2.A maximum development Community Development Director Hutmacher commented on October 14, 2013, the City Council issued an AUAR order and approved the following development scenarios to be evaluated in the TCAAP AUAR: Zoning Scenario: up to 1,500 residential units; 500,000 square feet of retail; and 1,700,000 square feet of non-retail commercial. Maximum Development Scenario: up to 2,500 residential units; 550,000 square feet of retail; and 1,950,000 square feet of non-retail commercial. This scenario increases the amount of development to maximum density based on the anticipated capacity of the transportation network, including reconstructed intersections at CR H and TH 10/CSAH 96, and an access to CR I. Community Development Director Hutmacher stated the master planning process is on schedule. The consultants anticipate having a draft of the Master Plan prepared for City Council review in December 2013 and Planning Commission review in January 2014. At the next TCAAP open house in January/February 2014, attendees will be asked to provide feedback on the draft Master Plan. The final Master Plan and the draft AUAR are both expected to be completed in spring 2014. ADJOURN Commissioner Hames moved, seconded by Commissioner Holewa, to adjourn the November 6, 2013, Planning Commission Meeting at 8:03 p.m. The motion carried unanimously (6-0).