HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-07-14 PC Minutes
Approved: July 9, 2014
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA
PLANNING COMMISSION
WEDNESDAY, MAY 7, 2014
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 Angela Hames, Andrew Holewa, Steven
Jones (Alternate), Roberta Thompson, and Clayton Zimmerman.
Absent: Commissioner Brent Bartel and Sam Scott.
Also present were: City Planner Ryan Streff; Associate Planner Matthew Bachler; and
Councilmember Fran Holmes.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA – MAY 7, 2014
Chair Larson stated the agenda will stand as published.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
April 9, 2014 – Planning Commission Regular Meeting
Commissioner Holewa moved, seconded by Commissioner Zimmerman, to approve the
April 9, 2014, Planning Commission Regular Meeting as presented. The motion carried
unanimously (6-0).
PLANNING CASES
A. Planning Case 14-014; Variance; 1850 Venus Avenue – Not a Public Hearing
City Planner Streff stated the applicant has requested a variance to construct a twenty-four (24)
foot by thirty-eight (38) foot or 912 square foot garage addition to 1850 Venus Avenue that
would encroach thirty (30) feet into the secondary front yard setback.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 7, 2014 2
City Planner Streff reported that the applicants in this case own the property located at 1850
Venus Avenue. The property is Zoned R-1 Single Family Residential and is generally positioned
north of County Road E2 West, south of Venus Avenue, east of Interstate 35W and west of
Snelling Avenue North. The subject property is considered by the Zoning Code to be a corner lot,
as it is situated at the corner of Venus Avenue and Rolling Hills Road. However, Rolling Hills
Road is an unimproved City right-of-way that terminates approximately 200 feet south of Venus
Avenue and is used solely for trail purposes. This area was platted in 1956 as Shorewood Hills
Addition No. 6 and Rolling Hills Road was stubbed in for a future connection to County Road E2
West. The connection to County Road E2 West was never completed and is unlikely to be
developed as the land to the south is within Tony Schmidt Regional Park and the need for an
additional access to this subdivision is unwarranted at this time.
Staff explained that the applicants are proposing to construct a twenty-four (24) foot by thirty-
eight (38) foot or 912 square foot attached garage to the east side of the single family dwelling.
The garage would be constructed between the existing dwelling and the east property line. As
proposed, the new addition would encroach thirty (30) feet into the forty (40) foot secondary
front yard setback along the platted right-of-way for Rolling Hills Road. The required forty (40)
foot setback along Venus Avenue would be maintained along with the remaining rear and side
yard setbacks. A variance to encroach thirty (30) feet into the secondary front yard setback is
being requested, which would leave a setback of ten (10) feet from the east property line.
City Planner Streff indicated that grading would be conducted along the north and east sides of
the home in order to prepare the new garage pad and driveway, and to reclaim the existing
driveway area back to a natural vegetative state. The site plan indicates that some amount of
grading would occur in the City’s right-of-way along Rolling Hills Road. Any grading to be
completed in the right-of-way would require approval by the City in conjunction with Grading
and Erosion Control Permit.
City Planner Streff stated that the applicants have indicated that the façade and roofing
materials to be used on the new garage addition would match the materials on the existing home.
Following the construction of the new addition the existing tuck-under garage would be
converted to functioning living space, the existing driveway and stairway up to the front door
would be removed and new landscaping would be installed. In order to create a finished look the
façade area on the former garage would be designed to match the existing home so that a
consistent exterior façade is maintained. Once removed the old concrete driveway area would be
graded to match the existing grade along the front of the home. Two new trees would be planted
to fulfill the Tree Preservation Ordinance and tree mitigation standards.
Site Data
Land Use Plan: Low Density Residential
Existing Land Use: Single Family Detached Residential
Zoning: R-1: Single Family Residential
Current Lot Sizes: .3574 Acres (15,569 Square Feet)
Topography: The east side of the has a fair amount of
grade change in the location of the proposed
garage
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 7, 2014 3
City Planner Streff reviewed the surrounding area, the Plan Evaluation and the Variance
Evaluation Criteria.
City Planner Streff provided the Findings of Fact for review:
General Findings
1. The property is in the R-1 Single Family Residential Zoning District.
2. The lot is 15,569 square feet in size with approximate dimensions of 133.5 feet in width,
and 116.5 feet in depth. Although the total square footage of the lot meets the
requirements in the R-1 Zoning District the actual dimensions of the lot do not meet the
minimum size requirements.
3. The existing dwelling and attached tuck-under garage meet all property line setbacks.
4. The proposed garage addition would encroach thirty (30) feet into the forty (40) foot
secondary front yard setback along the right-of-way platted as Rolling Hills Road.
5. The proposed addition does not encroach into the rear yard setback or the front yard
setback along Venus Avenue.
6. The platted section of right-of-way for Rolling Hills Road is used solely for the purposes
of a city and county trail.
7. The unimproved right-of-way known as Rolling Hills Road extends approximately 200
feet from Venus Avenue, where it terminates at the adjacent property line for Tony
Schmidt Regional Park. At this time, there are no plans to extend the right-of-way or
construct a roadway in this area.
8. The existing garage would be converted into living space and the existing driveway
would be removed if a variance is granted.
9. The proposed structure and landscaping coverages are within the zoning district
requirements.
10. The dwelling with the proposed addition would not exceed the 35 foot height limit.
11. Single Family Dwellings are permitted structures within the R-1 Zoning District.
12. The existing dwelling and the proposed garage are outside of the 100-year flood plain,
wetlands, and easements.
13. The property directly east of the subject property located at 1834 Venus Avenue
encroaches into the secondary front yard setback along Rolling Hills Road approximately
fifteen (15) feet.
Variance Findings:
14. The proposal is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance as the
Ordinance generally allows flexibility for unique parcels and situations when impacts to
surrounding properties are minimized.
15. The proposal is consistent with the Arden Hills Comprehensive Plan as it allows the
reasonable use of residential property.
16. Single family dwelling are permitted and a reasonable use within the R-1 Single Family
Residential Zoning District.
17. The lot has rather unique characteristics for a corner lot within the City. The property is
situated on a corner lot, of which only one of the right-of-ways, Venus Avenue, consists
of an improved surface. The right-of-way known as Rolling Hills Road along the east side
of the property is unimproved and is used for trail purposes only. There are no plans at
this time to extend or improve this right-of-way.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 7, 2014 4
18. The proposed addition would be visible from neighboring properties; however, the
addition would not be inconsistent in terms of setbacks and lot coverage requirements for
typical non-corner lots. The property owner would match the materials used for siding
and roofing to the existing dwelling, which should minimize the impacts on surrounding
property owners.
19. The proposed addition is unlikely to have negative impacts to the property or to the
neighborhood as a whole. Based on the proposed setbacks the property would function as
a typical non-corner lot within the R-1 Single Family Residential District. The trail that
has been constructed within the right-of-way of Rolling Hills Road is not likely to be
affected by the proposed addition.
20. The proposed plans and variance request for the addition to the single family dwelling
does not appear to be based on economic considerations alone.
City Planner Streff stated that the findings of fact for this variance request support a
recommendation for approval. However, if the Planning Commission chooses to make a
recommendation for denial, the Findings of Fact would need to be amended to reflect the reasons
for the denial.
If the Planning Commission recommends approval on this variance, Staff recommends the
following seven (7) conditions:
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 applicant shall obtain a Grading and Erosion Control Permit from the City before
the building permit is issued.
3. That the final grade of the lot including the grade of the existing driveway shall be
approved by the City. The final grade shall match the character of the neighborhood and
the existing grade along the front of the home.
4. That grading shall not be allowed outside the property boundary lines without consent
from the adjacent property owner.
5. That a tree preservation plan and financial surety or escrow for these improvements shall
be submitted to the City before the building permit is issued.
6. That the structure shall conform to all other regulations in the City Code. That a building
permit for the construction of the garage and a zoning permit for the construction of the
driveway shall be required.
7. That the exterior façade of the addition and the existing garage area shall be the same
color and use the same construction materials as the existing structure. The final façade
shall be approved by the City Planner.
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
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 7, 2014 5
Chair Larson opened the floor to Commissioner comments.
Commissioner Thompson requested further information on how the property will be graded.
City Planner Streff reported this had been discussed with the City Engineer and he understands
that the majority of the site would drain towards Venus Avenue to the north and to the east along
the Rolling Hills Road right-of-way.
Commissioner Holewa asked if this property abutted a City right-of-way.
City Planner Streff stated that Venus Avenue and Rolling Hills Road are both City right-of-
ways .
Commissioner Holewa asked whether staff had discussed the option of vacating the Rolling
Hills Road right-of-way. He explained that if the right-of-way were to be vacated, the need for a
variance would be eliminated.
Chair Larson stated that if the right-of-way was vacated, the property would have to be divided
between the two adjacent property owners.
City Planner Streff commented that City staff has discussed the possibility of vacating this
right-of-way, which could eliminate the need for a variance. However, after discussion among
staff, this was not recommended as a feasible option because of the public utilities and the trail
located within the right-of-way.
Commissioner Hames explained she lived across the street from the subject property. She
indicated the original intention was to extend a road through between these houses with a cul-de-
sac. She noted that a fire hydrant was located within the Rolling Hills Road right-of-way area.
She stated for the record that she fully supported the applicant’s request.
Commissioner Hames moved and Commissioner Zimmerman seconded a motion to
recommend approval of Planning Case 14-014 for a Variance at 1850 Venus Avenue based
on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, as amended by the seven (7) conditions in
the May 7, 2014, report to the Planning Commission. The motion carried 5-1 (Holewa
opposed).
B. Planning Case 14-015; PUD Amendment & Site Plan Review – Boston Scientific –
4100 Hamline Avenue North – Public Hearing
Chair Larson recused himself on this item.
Associate Planner Bachler stated the applicant has requested a Planned Unit Development
Amendment and Site Plan Review to construct a 730 square foot addition on the south side of
Building 10 on the Boston Scientific Corporation Campus.
Associate Planner Bachler reported that Boston Scientific is requesting a Master PUD (11th)
Amendment and Site Plan Review to construct a 730 gross square foot addition on the south side of
Building 10, which is located in the south central portion of the Boston Scientific Campus. Building
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 7, 2014 6
10 is also identified on the campus Master Plan as Building D. The purpose of the addition is to
provide storage and support for ongoing product development and research.
Associate Planner Bachler indicated that the addition would infill an existing paved courtyard and
would match the adjacent roofline at approximately 13 feet above grade. The structure of the
building would be concrete masonry with a steel beam and deck roof structure. The exterior finish
will be face brick with color and coursing to match the existing construction.
Associate Planner Bachler commented that the existing landscaped area where the addition will
be constructed is turf grass with a mix of mature trees. All areas disturbed by the construction will be
restored to their previous condition. Building 10 is heavily screened from the south by a wooded
wetland area located between the building and County Road F. The additional trees needed to meet
the City’s landscaping requirements would be added on the east side of Innovation Way near the
Cumming Park Drive turnaround.
Site Data
Land Use Plan: Light Industrial and Office
Existing Land Use: Light Industrial and Office
Zoning: I-1: Limited Industrial / PUD Overlay
Size: 92.8 acres
Proposed Density: N/A
Topography: Level
Associate Planner Bachler reviewed the surrounding area, Boston Scientific’s previous Planning
Cases, Master Plan and the Plan Review.
Associate Planner Bachler provided the Findings of Fact for review:
1. A Master PUD was approved for 4100 Hamline Avenue North in Planning Case #02-025.
2. The proposed 730 square foot addition to Building 10 was not included in the approved
Master Plan and an amendment to the PUD is therefore required.
3. The Master PUD requires that a Site Plan Review be applied for prior to the construction of
any building or addition.
4. The property is located in the I-1: Limited Industrial District.
5. The proposal is in conformance with the zoning and design standard requirements for the I-1:
Limited Industrial District.
6. The applicant has provided a Parking Calculation Plan that shows adequate “Proof of
Parking” spaces in the event that additional parking is needed.
7. The proposal is not expected to exceed noise limits set by the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency.
8. The proposal will not adversely impact the surrounding neighborhood or the City as a whole.
Associate Planner Bachler stated based on the submitted plans and findings of fact, staff
recommends approval of Planning Case 14-015 for a Planned Unit Development Amendment and
Site Plan Review at 4100 Hamline Avenue North. Staff recommends the following three (3)
conditions to be included with the approval:
1. The project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted as amended by the
conditions of approval. Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by the City
Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 7, 2014 7
2. A PUD Amendment drafted by the City Attorney shall be executed prior to the issuance of a
building permit.
3. The Master PUD Amendment and Site Plan Review shall automatically expire and become
void one (1) year after the date on which the Council granted such approval if work on the
project has not begun.
Associate Planner Bachler reviewed the options available to the Planning Commission on this
matter:
1. Recommend Approval with Conditions
2. Recommend Approval as Submitted.
3. Recommend Denial
4. Table
Vice Chair Thompson opened the floor to Commissioner comments.
Vice Chair Thompson opened the public hearing at 6:57 p.m.
Vice Chair Thompson invited anyone for or against the application to come forward and make
comment.
There being no additional comment Vice Chair Thompson closed the public hearing at 6:58
p.m.
Vice Chair Thompson asked if the proof of parking would be sufficient to meet the needs of the
site.
Associate Planner Bachler explained that Boston Scientific has not had any issues with parking
on the campus, and had reserved areas that could be developed into additional parking if there
was an increase in demand. He indicated that staff was recommending that the proof of parking
be accepted in lieu of additional parking stalls.
Vice Chair Thompson questioned if there were noise concerns that should be considered with
the proposed addition.
Associate Planner Bachler stated this was discussed with Boston Scientific. He reported that
one small additional rooftop unit would be added to Building 10. He did not anticipate that this
unit would impact the surrounding properties as it was a substantial distance from neighboring
properties.
Commissioner Holewa moved and Commissioner Hames seconded a motion to recommend
approval of Planning Case 14-015 for a Planned Unit Development Amendment and Site
Plan Review at 4100 Hamline Avenue North based on the findings of fact and the
submitted plans, as amended by the three (3) conditions in the May 7, 2014, report to the
Planning Commission. The motion carried unanimously (5-0).
UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 7, 2014 8
None.
REPORTS
A. Planning Commission Comments and Requests
None.
B. Report from the City Council
Councilmember Holmes updated the Planning Commission on the City Council from the April
14, 2014, City Council TCAAP Work Session stating the City Council provided comments and
feedback on the Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) and Mitigation Plan for the
TCAAP redevelopment. An AUAR is a form of environmental documentation through Minnesota
State Rules that evaluates development scenarios for a geographical area rather than a specific
project. The Mitigation Plan provides information on the actions which are advisable, recommended,
or necessary to protect the environment and minimize potential impacts by the proposed
development scenarios.
Public comments on the Draft AUAR and Mitigation Plan will be accepted until May 28, 2014. The
documents are available on the City’s website for review. The City Council will review the final
AUAR and Mitigation Plan, including responses to public comments, on June 30. Final City Council
approval is scheduled for July 28.
At the April 21, 2014 Work Session, the City Council directed staff to update the existing contract
with Eureka Recycling to transition the City’s recycling program to single stream collection. The
switch to single stream will also allow for the collection of additional types of plastics. The recycling
program will continue to use the green bins currently being used by City residents. Before any
official changes to the program take place, educational materials will be provided to residents to
ensure correct collection procedures.
Councilmember Holmes noted that Eureka was aware of the organics collection mandate included
in the Ramsey County Solid Waste Plan and that staff would have further discussions with Eureka
regarding this when negotiating the contract extension later this year.
At the April 28, 2014 Regular Meeting, the City Council approved Ordinance 14-004 rezoning parks
and opens spaces managed by the City and Ramsey County as Parks and Open Space District, and
Ordinance 14-005 rezoning portions of the Arden Hills Army Training Site as Conservation District.
The City Council also approved Planning Case 14-012, which was a request from Hood Packing for
a PUD Amendment allowing for the installation of an additional exterior storage tank on their
property. The Planning Commission recommended approval of both of these planning cases at their
April meeting.
The City Council also approved the request brought forward by the City to vacate certain portions of
right-of-way and easements in the area of Round Lake Road and Gateway Court, and to approve a
Preliminary and Final Plat of the Gateway 2nd Addition to correct and/or combine particular parcels.
The Planning Commission recommended approval of this request at their April meeting.
C. TCAAP Update
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 7, 2014 9
City Planner Streff reported that during the months of January, February, and March, staff and
consultants collected public comments on the draft Master Plan at meetings and events including:
• Joint Development Authority meeting, January 6, 2014
• Planning Commission work session, January 8, 2014
• Public Open House, January 22, 2014
• Five Cities meeting, March 10, 2014
• Development Interviews, January 30, February 20, and March 12, 2014
On April 14, 2014, the City Council reviewed a summary of public comments compiled by
Kimley-Horn.
On April 21, 2014, the City Council discussed recommendations from the Parks, Trails, and
Recreation Committee (PTRC) for amenities needed within each park area. The PTRC
recommendations, which were accepted by the City Council, can be summarized as follows:
• Park areas in neighborhoods should include play structures, a gazebo, and off-street
parking (located either in lots or in bump-outs along the public street);
• Parks should be located nearer to center or at the entrance to residential neighborhoods so
that park traffic is not routed through the neighborhood;
• An adult athletic facility (softball and hockey) should be located adjacent to a County
road. This facility should be lighted and ideally will have shared parking with adjacent
businesses.
City Planner Streff indicated that the City Council also discussed goals for the surface water
amenity on April 21. Council comments included:
• Pond areas should be well-maintained and should have water present at all times;
• Ponds may be connected by natural areas or a “brook” environment;
• Trails and benches should be included so that the surface water management can also be a
site amenity.
City Planner Streff explained that the City Council is scheduled to discuss residential densities
and the flex space land use on May 19, 2014. In preparation for this meeting, the City Council
was provided with suggestions for a self-guided mobile tour highlighting various types of
residential and commercial development. Planning Commission members may be interested in
the self-guided tour as well since it is relevant to upcoming discussions on zoning requirements
and design standards for residential and commercial development. The City Council was also
given three articles recommended by JDA Chair David Sand:
• Mixed-Income Housing – Myth and Fact
• Higher Density Development – Myth and Fact
• Visualizing Density, Chapter One
City Planner Streff reported that the City Council reviewed the draft Alternative Urban
Areawide Review (AUAR) on April 14, 2014. The draft AUAR and Mitigation Plan was
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 7, 2014 10
published in the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) Monitor on April 28, 2014. The document
was also sent to adjacent cities, the Mounds View School District, Rice Creek Watershed
District, the Minnesota National Guard, and other stakeholders and interested parties. Public
comments on the draft AUAR and Mitigation Plan will be accepted until May 28, 2014. The City
Council is tentatively scheduled to approve the final document on July 28, 2014.
City Planner Streff stated that Ramsey County, in cooperation with the City of Arden Hills, has
solicited proposals from engineering consultants for development and design of TCAAP Site
Infrastructure. The scope of services includes analysis, development, and preliminary and final
design of on-site public infrastructure to support the redevelopment including major roadways,
regional stormwater management facilities, sanitary sewer, and watermain. The consultant will
also assist the County and City in developing a site grading plan, mitigating impacts to existing
wetlands, and site platting.
City Planner Streff commented that proposals are due May 1 and work is expected to begin by
the end of the month. Getting the consultant started as soon as possible will enable coordination
between the design of on-site infrastructure with adjacent interchange improvements in order to
prepare the site for development in 2016. Both the County and City will participate in the cost of
the consultant work as outlined in a cost sharing agreement.
City Planner Streff indicated that the City submitted a Project Concept Plan, which is
essentially a pre-application to the Livable Communities Demonstration Account (LCDA), on
Thursday, May 1, 2014. The application includes a request for $1,605,000 in Livable Community
Act (LCA) funds as follows:
Use Description Request
Sidewalks and Trails Sidewalks and trails from the North Gateway entrance
through the Town Center
$105,000
Lighting Pedestrian-scale decorative lighting at the North Gateway
entrance and south through the Town Center
$400,000
Landscaping Landscaping at the North Gateway entrance and along the
spine road through the Town Center
$250,000
Site Preparation and
Grading
Grading work associated with the remeandering of Rice
Creek at the North Gateway entrance to restore natural
creek alignment and floodplain and to accommodate
amenities and local roadway connections
$650,000
Architecture and
Engineering
Architecture and engineering for the design of
improvements listed above
$200,000
By June 2, 2014, the Metropolitan Council will notify the City if it will be invited to submit a full
application. The deadline for the full application is June 30, 2014.
City Planner Streff stated that TCAAP-related topics will be discussed at the following regular
and special City Council meetings and work sessions. Planning Commissioners may choose to
attend meetings to hear presentations and City Council discussion.
May 12, 2014, Special Work Session at 5:30 pm, Community Room
• Infrastructure Study Update and City Cost Participation Agreement
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 7, 2014 11
• City TCAAP Finances Discussion
May 19, 2014, Regular Work Session at 5:00 pm; Council Chambers
• Ramsey County Financial Model
• Residential Development and Densities
• Flex Space Land Use Discussion
May 27, 2014 (Tuesday), Special Work Session at 5:30 pm,
• I-35W/Highway 96 Interchange Discussion
June 9, 2014, Special Work Session at 5:30 pm, Community Room
• Discussion topics to be determined (infrastructure, regulations and policies, etc.)
June 16, 2014, Regular Work Session at 5:00 pm, Council Chambers
• Review Revised Master Plan
• Review Aesthetics for I-35W Bridges
June 30, 2014, Special Work Session at 5:30 pm, Community Room
• Review Final AUAR and Mitigation Plan
June 30, 2014, Regular Meeting at 7:00 pm, Council Chambers
• Approve Master Plan
• Municipal Consent for I-35W/Highway 96
July 14, 2014, Regular Work Session at 5:00 pm, Council Chambers
• Discussion topics to be determined (infrastructure, regulations and policies, etc.)
July 21, 2014, Special Work Session at 5:30 pm, Community Room
• Discussion topics to be determined (infrastructure, regulations and policies, etc.)
July 28, 2014, Regular Meeting at 7:00 pm, Council Chambers
• Approve Final AUAR and Mitigation Plan
Staff anticipated that additional regular and special work session meetings will be scheduled to
discuss regulations and policies, the infrastructure study, and other TCAAP issues. Future
meeting topics will be defined as those dates draw nearer.
ADJOURN
Commissioner Holewa moved, seconded by Commissioner Thompson, to adjourn the May
7, 2014, Planning Commission Meeting at 7:24 p.m. The motion carried unanimously (6-0).