Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-06-12 PC Approved: CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, JUNE 6, 2012 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 6:33 p.m. ROLL CALL Present were: Chair Clayton Larson, Commissioners Andrew Holewa, Samuel Scott, Roberta Thompson, Clayton Zimmerman and Janet Stodola (Alternate) Absent: Commissioner Angela Hames Also present were: City Planner Meagan Beekman; Councilmember Brenda Holden; City Attorney John Miller, and Recording Secretary Debbie Wolfe. APPROVAL OF AGENDA – JUNE 6, 2012 Chair Larson stated the agenda will stand as published. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. April 18, 2012 - Planning Commission Special Meeting Commissioner Holewa noted on page 18 of the minutes, under B., second paragraph correct to read electronic billboards. He also noted on page 19 of the minutes, first paragraph the word “die” corrected to due in the second line. Commissioner Holewa moved, seconded by Commissioner Thompson, to approve the April 18, 2012 Planning Commission Special Meeting as corrected. The motion carried unanimously (6-0). B. May 9, 2012 - Planning Commission Regular Meeting Commissioner Holewa moved, seconded by Commissioner Thompson, to approve the May 9, 2012 Planning Commission Regular Meeting as presented. The motion carried unanimously (6-0). ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – June 6, 2012 2 PLANNING CASES A. Planning Case 12-010 – Site Plan Review; CSM Corporation, 4393 Lexington Avenue – Not a Public Hearing City Planner Meagan Beekman reviewed the applicant has requested approval of a Site Plan Review to allow the construction of a 1,807 square foot detached garage at 4293 Lexington Avenue S. CSM Corporation owns the property located at 4293 Lexington Avenue S. The property is zoned I-1. The property owner has submitted an application for a site plan review to allow the construction of a 1,807 square foot detached garage adjacent to the existing parking area on the site. A lease deal for the building is contingent on approval of the garage, which would be used to park the tenant’s service vans. The property does not currently operate under any special agreements with the City, and was originally approved through a site plan review in 1998. The Zoning Code requires a site plan review for all accessory structures on non-residential zoned parcels. City Planner Meagan Beekman noted the applicant has submitted an application, project description, narrative, a site plan and elevations, which are provided for Commission review. City Planner Meagan Beekman reviewed the surrounding area future land use plan, zoning and existing land use and provided the site data. A plan evaluation was reviewed: 1. Zoning Regulations – Section 1320.06 – District Requirements Chart A. Lot Coverage – Meets Requirements The proposed garage would be 1,807 square feet in size, and would convert 1,115 square feet of landscaped area to impervious area. A portion of the garage would be located over existing parking lot area. Currently 17.12% of the lot is covered by structures. The proposed garage would increase this amount to 18.33%. The Code requires no more than 30% structure coverage on parcels zoned I-1. B. Setbacks – Meets Requirements The Code requires a minimum ten-foot setback for accessory structures. The garage would exceed these minimum requirements. Section 1325 – General Regulations A. Height – Meets Requirements – In all zoning districts, which are not residential, the Code requires that accessory structures not exceed the height of the principal structure to which they are accessory. The proposed garage would not exceed 15 feet in height, which is far lower than the principal structure on the lot. B. Size – Meets Requirements – The Zoning Code requires that accessory structures in zoning district other than residential be limited in size by the lot coverage standards for the parcel. This requirement is met by the proposed plans. C. Exterior Finish – Meets Requirements – The Code requires the exterior finish of accessory structures to be compatible in appearance and materials ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – June 6, 2012 3 used with the principal structure served by the accessory structure. The proposed garage would be constructed of brick and EIFS in a color and texture that match the building materials of the existing principal structure. D. Landscaping and Tree Preservation – Meets Requirements - Five significant trees would be removed as a result of this application. The Code allows up to ten percent of the existing significant caliper inches on site to be removed without mitigation. The proposed amount to be removed is far below this threshold. Based on the size of the addition, additional landscaping is not required. E. Lighting – Meets Requirements – No additional lighting is proposed as part of this project. F. Parking, Loading and Circulation – Meets Requirements – No parking stalls would be lost as a result of this application. City Planner Meagan Beekman stated the City Public Works Director and Building Inspector have reviewed the project and have not expressed any objections to the proposal. Building permits will be required and all building and fire code requirements will be met. City Planner Meagan Beekman reviewed the Planning Commission must make a finding as to whether or not the proposal meets the requirements of the Zoning Code and if they would adversely affect the surrounding neighborhood or the community as a whole. She offered the following findings for consideration: 1. The subject property is located in the I-1 Zoning District 2. The proposed accessory structure is a permitted use in the I-1 District. 3. Accessory structures in the I-1 District require a site plan review. 4. The proposed accessory structure would be 1,807 square feet and 14 feet in height. 5. The proposed accessory structure meets all lot coverage requirements. 6. The proposed accessory structure meets all setback requirements. 7. The proposed accessory structure matches the color, texture and building materials of the principal structure to which it is accessory. 8. No parking would be lost as a result of this application. 9. The proposed tree loss due to the project would not trigger the City’s tree preservation ordinance requirements. City Planner Meagan Beekman reviewed notice was mailed to property owners within three-hundred fifty (350) feet of the subject property and no comments were received regarding this application. City Planner Meagan Beekman reviewed based on the findings; staff recommends approval of Planning Case #12-010 for a site plan review at 4293 Lexington Avenue subject to the following 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 applicant shall continue to abide by all previous agreements as amended by the conditions of approval of this application. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – June 6, 2012 4 3. A building permit shall be obtained for all proposed structures. Commissioner Thompson asked if there would be any impact with water run-off. City Planner Meagan Beekman stated the City Engineer has reviewed the case and stated there would not be an issue. Commissioner Stodola stated she walked by the area and feels the garage would be an improvement. Mr. John Ferrier, AIA, NCARB, LEED AP, CID, Director of Architecture for CSM Corporation was present at the meeting. He thanked the planning staff for their help on this matter. Chair Larson asked what the purpose of the garage would be and Mr. Ferrier stated it would be leased to a civil engineering company and the garage would be used to hold the survey trucks. Commissioner Holewa suggested a rain garden be put in and stated a donation of trees to the City is always accepted. Commissioner Zimmerman moved and Commissioner Holewa seconded a motion to approve Planning Case 12-010 for a Site Plan Review at 4293 Lexington Avenue based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans as amended by the conditions in the June 6, 2012 planning case report. The motion carried unanimously (6-0). B. Planning Case 12-011 – Zoning Code Amendment; City of Arden Hills; B-2 District – Public Hearing City Planner Meagan Beekman reviewed the Planning Commission is requested to consider approval of Planning Case 12-011 to Amend Section 1325.05 and 1320.06 of the Zoning Code to remove Multi-family Dwellings as a permitted use in the B-2 District, as presented in the report to the Planning Commission. City Planner Meagan Beekman stated at the March 19, 2012, joint work session the City Council and the Planning Commission discussed several possible zoning code amendments as part of the Planning Commission’s 2012 work plan. At that meeting, Staff was directed to proceed with a review of the B-2 District design standards and possible revisions that would ensure that the Zoning Code was adequately regulating development in line with the Guiding Plan for the B-2 District. It was discussed at the meeting that several developments have occurred, or been proposed, since October of 2008, when the Guiding Plan and subsequent Zoning Code Amendments for the B-2 District, were put into place. The direction given to Staff was to review land use applications since 2008, and the Zoning Code, to ensure that the design standards reflect the City’s vision for the B-2 District. Staff has begun this work and anticipates proposed Zoning Code amendments in the coming months. City Planner Meagan Beekman reviewed simultaneous to the review of design standards in the B-2 District, the City Council has also moved forward with Phase I of developing an implementation plan for the public improvements proposed to create a more pedestrian and bicycle friendly environment, as well as traffic management solutions that will improve the traffic flow and function of County Road E. The City has contracted with engineering firm Bolton and Menk to assist with this process, and the Council has ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – June 6, 2012 5 appointed a Corridor Advisory Committee, consisting of area business and property owners to provide recommendations to the Council. Bolton and Menk are scheduled to submit their final implementation plan this fall. City Planner Meagan Beekman stated the Guiding Plan for the B-2 District envisions a walkable downtown area in Arden Hills that is distinct, with a sense of arrival and destination that is unique in the community. The Guiding Plan identifies principals for the B-2 District that include allowing greater intensity of land uses in order to create a sense of place. As part of the process of developing the Guiding Plan the City had a traffic study done to identify how much development was possible along County Road E, and what traffic management improvements would be necessary to accommodate additional intensity of use. The traffic study found that current left turns onto County Road E could function, though with extended wait times, in the short-term, but that as traffic increased in the area the left turn waits could become an impediment to development and negatively impact property values. The traffic study indicated that some traffic management improvements would be necessary in order to accommodate additional intensity of land uses, and recommended the addition of a traffic signal halfway between Lexington Avenue and Pine Tree Drive on County Road E. The traffic signal would allow multiple accesses to be consolidated at one controlled intersection, which would greatly improve the left turn movements onto County Road E. The Guiding Plan identified land uses, including multi-family dwellings, as well as densities that were predicated on the assumption that a traffic light, or other traffic management solution that improves left turns onto County Road E, would be implemented in order to accommodate the additional traffic in this area. Commissioner Holewa stated he has concerns about traffic in this area. He was in favor of a stoplight in the area. He stated he does not see the amendment would solve any of the traffic issues. He does not know if he can prohibit property owners in this area from having multi-family housing. He stated a moratorium may make more sense. City Planner Beekman stated a moratorium would be possible as well. The City Council stated concern that a traffic light may not be possible. Ms. Beekman stated some traffic management solutions need to be implemented. Commissioner Holewa stated a plan came before the Planning Commission for multi- family housing, which was denied. He feels property owners should be allowed to present plans for Planning Commission consideration. Commissioner Zimmerman stated the City has no jurisdiction on County Road E. Ramsey County will deal with County Road E as they see fit. Commissioner Zimmerman would be in favor of a moratorium. Chair Larson stated during his commute there are many signal lights. He stated he is not in favor of another traffic light. He stated there needs to be a solution. Traffic is very heavy due to the construction. The traffic light is not an issue for him. Commissioner Stodola stated neighboring cities have multi-use buildings with housing on the upper floors. Chair Larson opened the public hearing at 6:55 p.m. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – June 6, 2012 6 Mr. Ed VonHoltum stated he was Chairman of the Economic Development Commission. He heard about this project by reading the newspaper. He asked how the proposed change came about. Chair Larson stated it came out of a joint meeting between Council and the Planning Commission to look at the B-2 District. Mr. VonHoltum asked if the current zoning was not adequate. Mr. VonHoltum stated there is a quarter mile of vacant buildings along County Road E. He was involved on a steering committee to work on the B-2 plan along with 14 members. They worked hard on the plan. Mr. Tim Keane, Malkerson Gunn Martin, LLP, representing the owners of the property on County Road E and Lexington. He stated they are against the amendment to the zoning code. He stated this amendment seems to be a result of the previous proposal to convert the Holiday Inn into multi-family housing. The current proposal is to convert the units to code compliant apartments. Mr. Keane stated zoning amendments can be started by a property owner, the Planning Commission or the City Council. Mr. Keane stated the concerns that seem to be driving this amendment are driven by traffic issues and trip generation. He presented a letter to the Planning Commission along with a trip generation analysis. He stated multi-family is on the low end of trip generation. He does not believe traffic should be driving this text amendment. Mr. Keane stated this is a mixed use district including commercial and residential. The inclusion of multi-family in this district was included in the comprehensive plan. He requested the Planning Commission delay any action on this and continue the discussion to continue the opportunity to explore this text amendment as well as the traffic issues that seem to be driving this. Mr. Rob Davidson, owner of 1201 property. He stated on May 14th they were denied their request at the City Council meeting. On May 23rd they received notice the City was planning to remove multi-family housing from the B-2 district. A new proposal will be coming before the Planning Commission in July. Mr. Davidson stated he has been developing commercial properties in this area for 30 years. The kinds of development being proposed at the 1201 County Road E property would be as good as their previous developments. He stated multi-family would be the least impact solution to the area. Mr. Davidson stated the apartment would be an advantage to the City. He requested the proposal of amending the zoning code be denied. Mr. Flaherty of Flaherty’s Arden Bowl. He is discouraged with the vacancies on County Road E. They had a property tax valuation done on their two parking lots and a consultant was brought in and her comment was the B-2 zoning is a deal killer for commercial business. He feels the Commission should be encouraging businesses rather than sending them away. He said we need to get serious on County Road E and start moving. He would be in favor of the multi-family plan that will be proposed in July. Chair Larson closed the public hearing at 7:19 p.m. Staff is recommending removing multi-family dwellings as a permitted use in the B-2 District while Bolton & Menk complete their work on Phase I of the B-2 District Implementation Plan. The expected outcome of Bolton & Menk’s work is a final report and recommendation for traffic management solutions that can be acted upon by the City. The hope is that removing multi-family dwellings is a temporary action; however, the City must first identify how to adequately address traffic management solution that can be agreed upon by the Council that will accommodate land uses and densities. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – June 6, 2012 7 City Planner Meagan Beekman stated notice was published in the Shoreview-Arden Hills Bulletin, and mailed to all property owners within the B-2 District. Commissioner Holewa asked if this passed would it be in conflict with the comprehensive plan. City Planner Beekman stated they are hoping this would not be a permanent change to the zoning code. She does not believe it would be a conflict. Commissioner Holewa asked if there is a completion date for Phase I and Ms. Beekman stated October. Commissioner Holewa stated he does not support this change because multi-family is included in the B-2 district, the Phase I is not complete and he feels it is being directed at one property. Commissioner Thompson stated there are other issues driving what they are trying to accomplish. The zoning code amendment would not address the issues that we are trying to fix. The City needs to look at this again and work with property owners. She would not be in favor of the zoning code amendment. Commissioner Holewa stated the development proposal presented last month was very incomplete. Chair Larson stated if we want people in the B-2 district, allowing multi-family housing would be the way to do it. Commissioner Holewa moved and Commissioner Zimmerman seconded a motion for denial of Planning Case 12-011 The motion carried unanimously (6-0). UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS None REPORTS A. Report from the City Council Councilmember Holden presented the report from the City Council reporting on the May 14, 2012 Regular Meeting, the May 21, 2012 Work Session and the May 29, 2012 Regular Meeting of the City Council. She stated the Sands Company from Arden Village has applied for a tax credit again this year. They have not requested TIF from the City. Councilmember Holden showed a sample of the Trail Park signs. A State of the City was discussed and it was decided not to have a meeting this year. Ramsey County is still trying to go forward to purchase the TCAAP property. She suggested the commissioners look at the website re-design. December 7th is the date for the launch of the new website. B. Planning Commission Comments and Requests ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – June 6, 2012 8 Chair Larson asked about the picnic last year as none of the Commissioners were present. City Planner Beekman stated the grill did not function properly as there were large flames. Commissioner Thompson asked if there is an update from Ramsey County on County Road E. Councilmember Holden stated she is in contact with Tony Bennett. The timing is being redone for the lights to allow more vehicles to merge upon the freeway. She suggested any complaints be referred to County Commissioner Tony Bennett. Commissioner Holewa asked if the Asian Restaurant Arden Plaza has re-opened as a result of a watermain break. C. Staff Comments None ADJOURN Commissioner Zimmerman moved, seconded by Commissioner Holewa, to adjourn the June 6, 2012, Planning Commission Meeting at 7:35 p.m. The motion carried unanimously (6-0).