Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-03-14 PC Minutes Approved: October 8, 2014 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 3, 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 Brent Bartel, Angela Hames, Andrew Holewa, Steven Jones (Alternate), Roberta Thompson, and Clayton Zimmerman. Absent: Commissioner Angela Hames and Sam Scott. Also present were: City Planner Ryan Streff; Associate Planner Matthew Bachler; and Councilmember Fran Holmes. APPROVAL OF AGENDA – SEPTEMBER 3, 2014 Chair Larson stated the agenda will stand as published. APPROVAL OF MINUTES July 9, 2014 – Planning Commission Regular Meeting Commissioner Holewa moved, seconded by Commissioner Zimmerman, to approve the July 9, 2014, Planning Commission Regular Meeting as presented. The motion carried unanimously (6-0). PLANNING CASES A. Planning Case 14-025; Site Plan Review; 3657 Snelling Avenue – Not a Public Hearing City Planner Streff stated that the applicants in this case own the property located at 3657 Snelling Avenue. The property is zoned R-1 Single Family Residential and is generally positioned north of Lake Johanna Boulevard, south of the Minneapolis & St. Paul Railroad, east of Oak Avenue and west of Snelling Avenue North. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – September 3, 2014 2 City Planner Streff indicated that the applicants are proposing to construct a twenty-four (24) foot by thirty (30) foot detached accessory structure on the property. The proposed structure would be constructed in front of the single family dwelling between the home and Snelling Avenue North. As proposed the structure would be located fifty-eight (58) feet from the front property line and twenty-eight (28) feet from the southern side yard property line. City Planner Streff reported that the applicants have attempted to design a plan that fits within the Zoning Code by moving the accessory structure adjacent to the home, however, this plan requires significant tree removal and grading for the proposed construction. Taking into consideration the current configuration of the existing principal structure and its location approximately two-hundred (200) feet from the front property line, it leaves limited options for the construction of an accessory structure that meets the all zoning regulations and minimizes tree loss and final grading on the property. City Planner Streff explained that within the narrative the applicants have indicated that the proposed accessory structure would be constructed with façade materials (i.e. siding, shingles and trim) to match the existing single family dwelling. The roof pitch would also be designed to match the principal structure on the property. Site Data Land Use Plan: Low Density Residential Existing Land Use: Single Family Detached Residential Zoning: R-1: Single Family Residential Current Lot Sizes: 2.22 Acres (96,581 Square Feet) Topography: The property has a fair amount of grade change as the lot slopes towards the wetland/pond on the property. However, the site of the proposed detached garage is fairly flat. City Planner Streff reviewed the surrounding area, Plan Evaluation and provided the following Findings of Fact for review: General Findings 1. The property is in the R-1 Single Family Residential Zoning District. 2. The lot is 96,581 square feet in size with approximate dimensions of 540 feet in width, and 230 feet in depth. 3. The property currently consists of a single family dwelling with an attached single stall garage. No accessory structures exist on the property at this time. 4. The proposed accessory structure is 720 square feet in size or twenty-four (24) feet by thirty (30) feet. 5. The proposed accessory structure is setback fifty-eight (58) feet from the front property line and twenty-eight (28) feet from the southern side yard. 6. The structure does not encroach into a front, side or rear yard setback. 7. The proposed structure and landscaping coverages are within the zoning district requirements. The new structure will increase the lot coverage from 5.36% to 6.62% and decreases the landscaping coverage from 94.64% to 93.38%. 8. The proposed accessory structure would not exceed fifteen (15) feet in height. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – September 3, 2014 3 9. Detached accessory structures up to seven hundred and twenty-eight (728) square feet are permitted structures within the R-1 Zoning District. 10. All structures on the lot are outside of the 100-year flood plain, wetlands, and easements. 11. 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. 12. The proposal is consistent with the Arden Hills Comprehensive Plan as it allows the reasonable use of residential property. 13. Detached accessory structures are permitted and a reasonable use within the R-1 Single Family Residential Zoning District. 14. The property is rather unique due to the placement of the existing single family dwelling in the rear of the lot approximately two-hundred (200) feet from the front property line. 15. The current placement of the single family dwelling leaves limited options for the construction of an accessory structure that meets all setback regulations and minimizes tree loss and final grading. 16. The proposed accessory structure would be visible from neighboring properties; however, the proposed location, design and the use of quality materials for the detached structure that are compatible in appearance to the single family dwelling should minimize the impacts on surrounding property owners. 17. The proposed accessory structure is unlikely to have negative impacts to the property or to the neighborhood as a whole. City Planner Streff stated that the property is fairly unique when compared to other properties in Arden Hills because of its topography, number of significant trees and the configuration of the single family dwelling on the lot. Because of the lot’s topography, natural drainage pattern, significant trees and the configuration of principal structure at the rear of the lot, options for the movement of the accessory structure to an area that meets all zoning regulations is very limited in order to minimize tree loss and grading on the property. Due to the scope of the project and the proposed addition of an accessory structure, the character of the neighborhood or the City is not expected to be negatively affected. City Planner Streff explained that the findings of fact for the Site Plan Review 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 of the Site Plan Review, staff recommends the following eight (8) 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 proposed accessory structure shall be permitted to be located in the front yard (between the dwelling and the street) at a distance of fifty-eight (58) feet from the front property line. 3. That the proposed accessory structure shall not exceed a footprint of 720 square feet. 4. That the exterior façade and roofing materials of the proposed detached accessory garage shall match or be compatible in appearance and material used with the principal structure. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – September 3, 2014 4 5. That the proposed driveway/parking area shall be improved with hard surface. No additional driveway/parking areas shall be constructed with gravel, “class 5” or other similar materials. 6. That no living quarters shall be constructed within the proposed accessory structure. 7. That the structure shall conform to all other regulations in the City Code. That a building permit for the construction of the new accessory structure and a zoning permit for the construction of the driveway shall be required. 8. That the applicant shall obtain a Grading and Erosion Control Permit from the City before the building permit is issued. 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 asked if the existing home had a garage and if it would be maintained. City Planner Streff reported that the existing home had a single car attached garage that would be maintained. Commissioner Bartel questioned why this Planning Case required a Site Plan Review versus a Variance. City Planner Streff indicated that the Zoning Code allows the Planning Commission and Council to review requests for accessory structures in exceptional and unusual circumstances through the Site Plan Review process. Commissioner Thompson asked if staff had reviewed the drainage on this property. City Planner Streff explained that the Assistant City Engineer had reviewed the case. He then discussed how water would flow on the site to the stormwater retention pond. He stated that a grading and erosion control permit would be required prior to the issuance of a City building permit. Chair Larson requested further information on the rain garden on the property. Eric Hanson, 3657 Snelling Avenue, reported that the rain garden was already on the property when he purchased the home. He indicated that the rain garden would remain in place and would not be impacted by the garage. Commissioner Holewa moved and Commissioner Thompson seconded a motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 14-025 for Site Plan Review at 3657 Snelling Avenue based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, as amended by the eight (8) ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – September 3, 2014 5 conditions in the September 3, 2014, report to the Planning Commission. The motion carried unanimously (6-0). Commissioner Holewa recommended that the Council consider all future Site Plan Review requests be handled at the staff level. B. Planning Case 14-026; Variance – 1830 Noble Road – Not a Public Hearing Associate Planner Bachler stated that the applicant in this case is Lee Homes, a custom builder contracted by the property owners to design and construct a new single-family dwelling at 1830 Noble Road. This project would also include the demolition of the existing structures on the property and the re-grading of the site. In the narrative submitted by the applicant, it has been noted that the existing structures are in poor condition and tests have shown that there is asbestos present throughout the home. The property is zoned R-2 Single and Two Family Residential and is generally located north of Lake Lane, south of Grant Road, east of New Brighton Road, and west of Lake Johanna Boulevard. Associate Planner Bachler reported that the subject property is considered by the Zoning Code to be a corner lot because it is situated at the intersection of Noble Road on the north and a limited-access alley off Lake Johanna Boulevard on the east. The property is unique in that the property boundary lines extend into the abutting street and alley. On the north side the property line extends approximately 16 feet into Noble Road, and on the east side the property line extends approximately 9 feet into the abutting alley. In cases where any portion of the lot extends into an abutting roadway the Zoning Code states that the lot line shall be deemed to be the street or alley line. However, the property is also subject to a public use easement that was granted to the City in 1955 when most properties along Noble Road were platted in the Elms Addition. The properties at 1830, 1832, 1834, and 1848 Noble Road were not platted as part of this subdivision, but public use easements across these properties were secured and are shown on the plat. Staff has reviewed this information with the City Attorney and has been advised that all required setbacks at 1830 Noble Road need to be taken from the public easement line and not the street or alley line. Associate Planner Bachler indicated that the existing dwelling on the property is non- conforming as it encroaches on the front yard setback along Noble Road and the secondary front yard setback along the alley. The existing home is situated approximately 32.7 feet from the easement line on the north side of the property and 19.9 feet from the easement line on the east side of the property. The applicant is proposing to construct a new single-family detached dwelling with a footprint of 1,766 square feet. The structure would include an attached three-car garage measuring 29 feet by 25 feet (approximately 725 square feet), and a main floor plan of 1,039 square feet. Associate Planner Bachler stated that as proposed, the structure would encroach approximately 16.5 feet into the required 40 foot secondary front yard setback as measured from the public use easement line along the alley, leaving a 23.5 foot setback from the easement line. The home would be situated approximately 31 feet from the alley line and 40 feet from the eastern property boundary line. The required 40 foot front yard setback along Noble Road would be maintained, as well as the required side and rear yard setbacks. Compared to the existing structure on the ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – September 3, 2014 6 property, the proposed dwelling would be located 7.8 feet further south from the Noble Road easement line and 3.6 feet further west from the alley easement line. Associate Planner Bachler commented that the applicant has indicated that the property owners intentionally designed a modest and compact home to fit into the general character of the neighborhood. At the time the land use application was submitted, staff believed the setback measurements would be taken from the street and alley line, not the public easement line, and the narrative submitted by the applicant regarding the variance request reflects this understanding. Site Data Land Use Plan: Low Density Residential Existing Land Use: Single Family Detached Residential Zoning: R-2: Single Family & Two Family Residential Current Lot Sizes: .39 Acres (17,207 square feet) Topography: Relatively flat Associate Planner Bachler reviewed the surrounding area, Plan Evaluation and the Variance Evaluation Criteria. Associate Planner Bachler provided the Findings of Fact for review: General Findings 1. The property at 1830 Noble Road is in the R-2 Single & Two Family Residential Zoning District. 2. The property is a corner lot because it is situated at and abutting on the intersection of two streets, Noble Road and a limited-access alley. A corner lot shall maintain front yard requirements for each street frontage. 3. The lot measures 91.5 feet in width by 188.04 feet in depth and has a total lot area of 17,207 square feet. 4. The northern property boundary line extends approximately sixteen feet into Noble Road and on the eastern property boundary line extends approximately nine feet into the abutting alley. 5. The Arden Hills Zoning Code defines the “lot line” as a property boundary line of any lot held in single or separate ownership or separately described; except that where any portion of the lot extends into the abutting street or alley, the lot line shall be deemed to be the street or alley line. 6. The northern lot line of the property is the street line of Noble Road and the eastern lot line is the alley line of the limited-access alley that abuts the property. 7. An easement runs along the northern 33 feet and the eastern 16.5 feet of the property. These easement areas were dedicated to the public use forever on the Elms Addition Plat. 8. The Elms Addition Plat was recorded in the Ramsey County Office of the Register of Deeds on June 22, 1955. 9. The easement area on the property measures 5,577 square feet. The net lot area subtracting the easement area is 11,630 square feet. 10. All required structure setbacks for the R-2 Zoning District shall be measured from the public easement line. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – September 3, 2014 7 11. The proposed structure would encroach 16.5 feet into the required 40 foot secondary front yard setback as measured from the public use easement line along the alley, leaving a 23.5 foot setback from the easement line. 12. The proposed structure conforms to all other setback requirements for the R-2 District. 13. The proposed structure and landscaping coverages are within the zoning district requirements. 14. The proposed dwelling would not exceed 35 feet in height. 15. Detached single-family dwellings are permitted structures within the R-2 Zoning District. 16. All structures on the lot are outside of the 100-year flood plain, wetlands, and easements. Variance Findings: 17. Detached single-family dwellings are permitted and a reasonable use within the R-2 Single & Two Family Residential Zoning District. 18. The purpose of the R-2 District is to among other things reserve development areas for single-family homes and to take advantage of municipal utilities. 19. The property is unique in that the secondary street frontage along the eastern property line is on a narrow one-way alley that principally provides rear yard access to properties that also have frontage on Lake Johanna Boulevard. This is the only alley of this type currently in the City of Arden Hills. 20. The proposed building plans for the single-family dwelling would result in a structure that is consistent and compatible with other construction in the area and would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. 21. The requested variance for the single-family dwelling does not appear to be based on economic considerations alone. Associate Planner Bachler stated that staff is supportive of the variance request in this planning case for several reasons. First, there is ambiguity in the Zoning Code on whether the corner lot designation should apply when one of the frontages is on an alley as opposed to a street. Section 1305.04 of the Zoning Code includes separate definitions for “street” and “alley”: • Streets. A public or private way, consisting in the case of a private way of a roadway and in the case of a public way of a roadway and a boulevard (the latter of which may contain a sidewalk), used primarily for vehicular traffic, whether designated as a street, avenue, parkway, road, lane, throughway, expressway, highway, place or however otherwise designated. • Alley. A minor public or private way which is used primarily for vehicular service access to the back or side of a lot abutting on a street. Associate Planner Bachler stated that the Zoning Code does not specifically reference alleys in its definition of a corner lot and it is unclear whether the intention is for alleys to be treated as a subset of streets, or whether they have a different classification. Staff has taken the position that the alley should be treated as a street and that the property is therefore a corner lot, but it is also sensitive to the argument that an alley is distinct from a street and that the required 40 foot setback may be excessive in this case. Associate Planner Bachler indicated that the public easement along the eastern side of property that was acquired during the platting process was likely needed in order to accommodate the ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – September 3, 2014 8 possible extension of Fairview Avenue further south. Given how this area has developed since then, it is unlikely that a designated street would be constructed where the alley is currently located. If there were a greater chance of a street expansion project in the future abutting 1830 Noble Road, staff would be less supportive of the variance request. Associate Planner Bachler reported that the neighborhood along Noble and Grant Roads was subdivided in the 1950s and most parcels in the area have a width of approximately 75 feet. Under the current zoning regulations for the R-2 District, these lots would be considered non- conforming as the minimum lot width in this district is 85 feet. Additionally, the existing requirement that corner lots maintain front yard setbacks along all street frontages had not been adopted at the time the area was first developed. This can be seen in the large number of dwellings on corner lots in the southwest part of the City which conform to the front yard setback along only one street frontage. For a 75-foot wide corner lot to be in compliance with the Zoning Code, the maximum width of a dwelling that could be constructed would be 30 feet to meet the secondary front yard setback of 40 feet and the side yard setback of 5 feet. Staff believes that in this area of the City, the corner lot setback requirements for non-conforming parcels due to lot width can be overly restrictive and limit the type of dwellings that can be constructed. Associate Planner Bachler explained 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 of this variance, staff recommends the following four conditions: 1. The project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted as amended by the conditions of approval. Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council. 2. The property owner shall obtain a Grading and Erosion Control Permit from the City before the building permit is issued. 3. A building permit and a demolition permit for the construction of the new dwelling and a zoning permit for the construction of the driveway shall be required. 4. The structure shall conform to all other regulations in the City Code. 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 Chair Larson opened the floor to Commissioner comments. Commissioner Holewa requested further information on the alleyway. Associate Planner Bachler provided further detail on how the City viewed the alleyway. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – September 3, 2014 9 Commissioner Jones questioned when the alley was constructed and asked who maintained the alleyway. Associate Planner Bachler reported the alley was maintained by the City. He was uncertain when the alley was constructed. Commissioner Zimmerman believed the existing house was four feet closer to the secondary front yard setback than the proposed home. Associate Planner Bachler stated that the existing home was 3.6 feet closer to the alley easement line than the proposed home. Commissioner Bartel asked if the existing accessory structures would be removed. Jerry Carlson, Lee Homes, reported these buildings would be removed. Associate Planner Bachler commented this could be made a condition for approval. Commissioner Bartel believed that the applicant was requesting a minor and reasonable deviation from the Zoning Code. For this reason he supported the variance request as the new home was a great use of space and would vastly improve the property. Commissioner Jones agreed. Commissioner Holewa moved and Commissioner Zimmerman seconded a motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 14-026 for a Variance at 1830 Noble Road based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, as amended by the four (4) conditions in the September 3, 2014, report to the Planning Commission. The motion carried unanimously (6-0). UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS None. REPORTS A. Planning Commission Comments and Requests None. B. Report from the City Council Councilmember Holmes updated the Planning Commission on City Council activities from the July 28, 2014, City Council Meeting stating the Council unanimously approved Planning Case 14-017, which was a variance request at 3441 Lake Johanna Boulevard to reconstruct a non- conforming accessory structure with minor modifications to the location and roofline. The Planning Commission recommended approval of this case 4-1 (Holewa opposed) at their meeting on July 9, 2014. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – September 3, 2014 10 The City Council also approved a resolution to adopt the TCAAP Final Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) and Mitigation Plan. An 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. The adopted AUAR and Mitigation Plan will serve as a working document for the TCAAP site going forward. The City Council held the first of three workshops with Gateway Planning, the zoning sub- consultant for the TCAAP Master Plan, on August 18. Gateway Planning provided an introduction to performance based zoning, reviewed the framework and important elements of the code, and discussed the initial draft of chapters 1 through 5, which are the administrative and process sections of the code. At the second workshop on September 15, the City Council will be discussing standards for building and site development, building design, open space areas, streetscape and landscaping, and signs. The City Council continued their discussion of chapters 1 through 5 of the TCAAP Redevelopment Code (TRC) at the Work Session on August 25. Specific topics of discussion included the relationship of the TRC to other City Ordinances, the development review process, and the appropriate mix of different housing types. C. TCAAP Update City Planner Streff reported that the utility poles are being removed from the site. The remaining building slabs are also being removed and the concrete processed into aggregate. He explained Ramsey County has chosen a consultant for the TCAAP Energy Plan. The consultant’s name will be announced once the contract is finalized. The Energy Advisory Board will begin meeting in September, and a white paper is expected to be presented to the Joint Development Authority in November. City Planner Streff indicated that Ramsey County will be redesigning the County’s TCAAP website which currently can be found at www.tcaap.net. The new website will go live in early 2015 and will provide information on marketing, infrastructure, remediation, the Joint Development Authority, and other topics. Public documents related to remediation and development will be made available through this website, either through a direct post or a link. City Planner Streff stated that Ramsey County announced that Rice Creek Commons has been chosen as the marketing name for the TCAAP site. The name was chosen because it highlights the site’s location adjacent to Rice Creek and its proximity to both downtowns. Whether the name will be the official name going forward is unclear at this time. Developers have indicated that it will be important to rebrand the property due to negative connotations associated with the TCAAP name. City Planner Streff commented that special and regular City Council work session meetings have been scheduled to discuss issues related to the Master Plan and City infrastructure. Discussion topics are tentatively planned as follows: September 8, 2014, Special Work Session at 5:30 pm, Community Room • Spine Road and Grading Design Review (Infrastructure) ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – September 3, 2014 11 • Final Discussion of Chapters 1-5 (Introduction, Components of the Code, Administration, Definitions, Schedule of Uses) September 15, 2014, Regular Work Session at 5:00 pm, Council Chambers • Workshop with Gateway Planning o Final review of Chapters 1-5 (Introduction, Components of the Code, Administration, Definitions, Schedule of Uses) o Present Zoning Chapters 6-7, 9-11 (Building and Site Development Standards, Building Design Standards, Open Space Standards, Streetscape and Landscape Standards, Sign Standards) September 22, 2014, Special Work Session at 5:00 pm, Council Chambers (4th of 5 Mondays) • Discuss Commercial Districts (components of Chapters 6, 7, 10, 11) September 29, 2014, Special Work Session at 5:30 pm, Community Room • County Road I and Thumb Road Design Review (Infrastructure) • Discuss Residential Districts (components of Chapters 6, 7, 10, 11) October 13, 2014, Special Work Session at 5:30 pm, Community Room • Stormwater System Update (Infrastructure) • Final Discussion Chapters 6-7, 10-11 (Building and Site Development Standards, Building Design Standards, Streetscape and Landscape Standards, Sign Standards) October 20, 2014, Regular Work Session at 5:00 pm, Council Chambers • Discuss Chapter 9 (Open Space Standards) October 27, 2014, Special Work Session at 5:30 pm, Community Room • Water and Sewer System Update (Infrastructure) • Final review of Chapter 9 (Open Space Standards) November 10, 2014, Special Work Session at 5:30 pm, Community Room • Discuss Chapter 8 (Street Design Standards) November 17, 2014, Regular Work Session at 5:00 pm, Council Chambers • Final Workshop with Gateway Planning o Final Review of Chapter 8 (Street Design Standards) o Review entire document Staff anticipates that additional regular and special work session meetings will be scheduled to discuss TCAAP issues. Future meeting topics will be defined as those dates draw nearer. Chair Larson did not support the TCAAP site being called Rice Creek Commons. He believed a better, long-term name could be found for the site. Councilmember Holmes stated the name change was still up in the air. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – September 3, 2014 12 Commissioner Zimmerman did not want the TCAAP property to be considered a separate entity from the remainder of Arden Hills. Commissioner Bartel believed that the name was simply a marketing tool. ADJOURN Commissioner Zimmerman moved, seconded by Commissioner Holewa, to adjourn the September 3, 2014, Planning Commission Meeting at 7:29 p.m. The motion carried unanimously (6-0).