Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-09-19 PCAPPROVAL OF THE AGENDA APPROVAL OF MINUTES September 4th, 2019 Planning Commission Regular Meeting 09 -04 -19 MINUTES.PDF PLANNING CASES Planning Case 19 -014 –Mounds View High School –Interim Use Permit (Public Hearing Required) MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF ATTACHMENT C.PDF ATTACHMENT D.PDF ATTACHMENT E.PDF Planning Case 19 -012 –Presbyterian Homes –Site Plan Review (No Public Hearing Required) MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF ATTACHMENT C.PDF Planning Case 19 -011 –1314 Cannon Avenue –Variance (No Public Hearing Required) MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF ATTACHMENT C.PDF Planning Case 19 -013 –1932 County Road E W –Variance (No Public Hearing Required) MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF ATTACHMENT C.PDF ATTACHMENT D.PDF ATTACHMENT E.PDF UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS COMMENTS AND REPORTS Report From The City Council Planning Commission Comments ADJOURNMENT ADJOURN A quorum of the City Council may be present at this meeting. Chair: Nick Gehrig Commissioners: Steven Jones James Lambeth Subbaya Subramanian Paul Vijums Jonathan Wicklund Clayton Zimmerman Council Liaison: Dave McClung Planning Commission October 9, 2019 6:30 p.m. City Hall Address: 1245 W Highway 96 Arden Hills MN 55112 Phone: 651 -792 -7800 Website : www.cityofardenhills.org City Vision Arden Hills is a strong community that values its unique environmental setting, strong residential neighborhoods, vital business community, well -maintained infrastructure, fiscal soundness, and our long -standing tradition as a desirable City in which to live, work, and play. Agenda CALL TO ORDER 1. 2. 2.A. Documents: 3. 3.A. Documents: 3.B. Documents: 3.C. Documents: 3.D. Documents: 4. 5. 5.A. 5.B. 6. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDAAPPROVAL OF MINUTESSeptember 4th, 2019 Planning Commission Regular Meeting09-04 -19 MINUTES.PDFPLANNING CASESPlanning Case 19 -014 –Mounds View High School –Interim Use Permit (Public Hearing Required)MEMO.PDFATTACHMENT A.PDFATTACHMENT B.PDFATTACHMENT C.PDFATTACHMENT D.PDFATTACHMENT E.PDFPlanning Case 19 -012 –Presbyterian Homes –Site Plan Review (No Public Hearing Required) MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF ATTACHMENT C.PDF Planning Case 19 -011 –1314 Cannon Avenue –Variance (No Public Hearing Required) MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF ATTACHMENT C.PDF Planning Case 19 -013 –1932 County Road E W –Variance (No Public Hearing Required) MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF ATTACHMENT C.PDF ATTACHMENT D.PDF ATTACHMENT E.PDF UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS COMMENTS AND REPORTS Report From The City Council Planning Commission Comments ADJOURNMENT ADJOURN A quorum of the City Council may be present at this meeting. Chair:Nick GehrigCommissioners:Steven JonesJames LambethSubbaya SubramanianPaul VijumsJonathan WicklundClayton Zimmerman Council Liaison:Dave McClung Planning Commission October 9, 2019 6:30 p.m. City Hall Address:1245 W Highway 96 Arden Hills MN 55112 Phone:651 -792 -7800 Website : www.cityofardenhills.org City VisionArden Hills is a strong community that values its unique environmental setting, strong residential neighborhoods, vital business community, well -maintained infrastructure, fiscal soundness, and our long -standing tradition as a desirable City in which to live, work, and play. AgendaCALL TO ORDER1.2.2.A.Documents:3.3.A.Documents:3.B.Documents: 3.C. Documents: 3.D. Documents: 4. 5. 5.A. 5.B. 6. Approved: October 9, 2019 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 4, 2019 6:30 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Chair Nick Gehrig called to order the regular Planning Commission meeting at 6:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Present were: Chair Nick Gehrig, Commissioners Steven Jones, James Lambeth, Jonathan Wicklund, and Clayton Zimmerman. Absent: Commissioners Subbaya Subramnian and Paul Vijums. Also present were: Community Development Manager/City Planner Mike Mrosla and Councilmember Fran Holmes. APPROVAL OF AGENDA – SEPTEMBER 4, 2019 Chair Gehrig stated the agenda will stand as published. APPROVAL OF MINUTES July 10, 2019 – Planning Commission Regular Meeting Commissioner Lambeth moved, seconded by Commissioner Zimmerman, to approve the July 10, 2019, Planning Commission Regular Meeting as presented. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). PLANNING CASES A. Planning Case 19-008; Drive-Through Menu Board Sign Code Text Amendment – Public Hearing Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla stated over the last few years drive- through facilities have moved away from the traditional changeable copy drive-through menu boards to dynamic display signs. Dynamic display signs are becoming the preferred method of internal and exterior menu boards for restaurants and other establishments. Dynamic display ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – September 4, 2019 2 menu board signs are more cost-effective than traditional menu boards and reduce the amount of waste in landfills. The digital display is also more energy efficient as current LED technology has a far greater lifespan than traditional bulbs and ballasts. The use of digital displays in drive- throughs reduces wait time spent in the drive-throughs by only offering items that are available, thereby reducing vehicle stacking. Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla reported all of the existing drive- through menu boards in the community consist of changeable paper copies and are backlit by bulbs. In the past, staff has utilized free standing sign requirements or designated the signs as incidental sign. An incidental sign is any sign that is generally not understandable or readable from property other than where the sign is located, such as from adjacent property or a public street. Upon review, the majority of existing drive-through menu board signs were approved as incidental signs and were not evaluated as they were located out of view. The proposed amendment would require staff to review menu boards. Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla reviewed the proposed text amendment with the Commission in further detail and 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 Gehrig opened the public hearing at 6:44 p.m. Chair Gehrig invited anyone for or against the application to come forward and make comment. Tracy Diehl, McDonald’s representative, stated she was an expert in the sign industry. She explained other businesses were beginning to use dynamic display menu signs and commented on how a text amendment would benefit the City of Arden Hills. She reported it was becoming increasingly difficult and expensive for fast food restaurants to use the old types of signs. She discussed the expense of keeping these signs operational and difficulty businesses had finding replacement parts. She thanked the Commission for their consideration on the proposed text amendment. There being no additional comment Chair Gehrig closed the public hearing at 6:48 p.m. Commissioner Jones questioned what kind of menu signs were allowed in the past. Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla stated menu signs were classified as auxiliary signs and/or an incidental sign. He commented many signs were viewed to be internal to the site and did not require a permit. Commissioner Jones reported this technology would continue to change and evolve over time and would revolutionize storefronts in the future. He indicated he was pleased the City was reviewing this chapter of City Code. He stated he supported the proposed change. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – September 4, 2019 3 Commissioner Lambeth asked if banks, post offices and pharmacies should be considered within this amendment because they all had drive through facilities. Ms. Diehl commented on the discussions she had with staff to amend City Code regarding restaurant menu signs. She indicated she did not see drive through menu boards being used at post offices, pharmacies or banks at this time. She explained this may change over time. She recommended the proposed language change be made to address dynamic display menu boards. Commissioner Lambeth questioned if this was truly an environmentally friendly option. Ms. Diehl stated this change was an environmentally friendly option because it allows restaurants to change menus without generating a great deal of paper waste. In addition, she reported the ballasts and bulbs in the dynamic display signs were LED and not fluorescent. Commissioner Lambeth inquired what was the maximum height that would be allowed for the dynamic display signs. Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla reported the maximum height would be eight feet. Commissioner Lambeth commented he believed it was easier to read a menu sign that was more horizontal in nature than vertical. He recommended fast food restaurants consider orienting their signs in this manner. He questioned if the speaker systems would be changed out with the new dynamic display signs. Ms. Diehl indicated the existing speaker systems at McDonald’s would remain in place. Commissioner Wicklund asked why the text on the dynamic display menus would be changing three times a day. Ms. Diehl explained the menus would change for breakfast, lunch and dinner. She commented on the importance of being able to remove items from the menu that were sold out. Commissioner Wicklund questioned if there were any fast food restaurants that were creating noise issues in the community. Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla reported he was not aware of any concerns at this time. Commissioner Zimmerman noted several grammatical changes that should be made corrected within the text amendment. Chair Gehrig recommended the menu boards be allowed to be changed three times a day. He stated he supported clarifying the sign height to ensure the language reads the sign shall be no taller than eight feet above grade. Commissioner Jones commented three changes to the menu per day may be conservative. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – September 4, 2019 4 Councilmember Holmes asked if this amendment was for all restaurants in the City. Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla reported the proposed text amendment was establishments with drive through facilities. Further discussion ensued regarding the proposed text amendment for drive through facilities. Chair Gehrig reported the Commission could amend the proposed language to state it was for drive through restaurants. Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla reported the reference to drive through facility could be changed to drive through restaurant. Commissioner Wicklund moved and Commissioner Zimmerman seconded a motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 19-008 for proposed amendments to Chapter 12 – Sign Code, adding a definition for Menu Board Signs, and excluding dynamic displays menu boards from prohibit signs, and adding section 1240.04 Menu Board Signs requirements, as presented in the September 4, 2019 Report to the Planning Commission with the following modifications: a drive through menu sign height shall not exceed eight feet in height; menu text shall not change more than five times per day; and that restaurant fast food drive through references be made where the code previously read drive through facility. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). B. Planning Case 19-009; Amendment to Zoning Ordinance Regarding Clearcutting and Tree Preservation – Public Hearing Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla stated in the last few years, there have been cases where a property owner has clear-cut a parcel of land prior to submitting any development applications. Section 1325.055 of the City Code addresses tree preservation requirements, but the requirements are currently triggered by a development application. The code does not address the removal of vegetation prior to any application. Staff reviewed the proposed changes to City Code and explained the proposed language is intended to codify the need for a tree preservation plan prior to clearcutting a site. Clearcutting is part of a larger infill development discussion. This language may not address all the issues, but it does provide some protection for clear-cutting without a development application. Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla 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 Gehrig opened the public hearing at 7:31 p.m. Chair Gehrig invited anyone for or against the application to come forward and make comment. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – September 4, 2019 5 There being no comment Chair Gehrig closed the public hearing at 7:31 p.m. Commissioner Jones asked if the City had someone on staff that was an arborist or forester. Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla reported a member of the Public Works Department had a forestry background. Commissioner Lambeth asked if the amendment had a tree preservation provision for developers. Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla stated a provision was in place for developers requesting a preliminary plat. Commissioner Lambeth recommended all tree preservation requirements be reviewed by staff with developers through the permit application process. Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla indicated this was currently being done by staff. Commissioner Wicklund questioned what cases the City has had that brought this issue to light. Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla reported he was unfamiliar with the cases and deferred this question to Councilmember Holmes. Councilmember Holmes stated this was an evolution and direction from the Council to staff based on cases where residents have clear cut their lots, especially on the lake. Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla explained staff was given direction from the Council to see how other cities addressed clearcutting and how they worked to recoup lost trees. He reported this information would be brought to the Commission at a future meeting. Commissioner Wicklund stated it would be beneficial for the Commission to have practical examples of clear cutting issues that occurred in the City. He explained he was trying to understand the need for this code amendment and who it would impact. In addition, he wanted to better understand if this code amendment was for developers or for residents. He indicated he would also like to know more about what the penalty would be for breaking this portion of City Code. Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla commented this language amendment was mostly development related. He agreed there should be an opportunity to impose fines or require tree replacement. He indicated this would be difficult to enforce for residents that were simply unaware of City Code tree preservation requirements. Commissioner Zimmerman asked if an individual homeowner could remove a tree without a permit. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – September 4, 2019 6 Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla explained a permit would not be required currently, but noted if a certain number of caliper inches (10%) were removed, then a permit and a replacement plan would be required. Commissioner Lambeth stated he did not want to see the City over reaching with this Code amendment. He questioned who would be certifying the landscaping plans. Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla commented generally a landscape architect would have this certification power. Commissioner Jones discussed the recent Land O’Lakes expansion and described the trees that were lost and replanted. He asked if tree trimmers were required to receive a permit from the City. Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla explained a license with the City was required but a permit from the property owner was not required. Chair Gehrig stated he believed the proposed language made sense for developers. He suggested this portion of City Code requirements be separated for developers and residential homeowners. Commissioner Wicklund questioned if this Code amendment was an urgent matter. Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla indicated the Commission could table action on this item in order to allow staff to take a deeper look at the language and would bring this item back to the Commission at a future meeting. Commissioner Wicklund supported this recommendation. Commissioner Lambeth moved and Commissioner Jones seconded a motion table action on this item directing staff to further investigate the language within this City Code text amendment and to report back at a future Planning Commission meeting. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS None. REPORTS A. Report from the City Council Councilmember Holmes updated the Planning Commission on City Council activities from the July and August. She explained the Council approved the Summit development. She noted the Council recently discussed the B-2 and B-3 design standards at a worksession meeting and this item would be coming before the Planning Commission. She reported the City now had an Associate Planner Joseph Hartman. She commented the Council was working on the 2020 budget and preliminary tax levy. She reported the City was working to address the traffic ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – September 4, 2019 7 surrounding the Mounds View High School in order to improve pedestrian safety. Lastly, she explained the City was in litigation with the County regarding TCAAP. B. Planning Commission Comments and Requests None. ADJOURN Commissioner Jones moved, seconded by Commissioner Zimmerman, to adjourn the September 4, 2019, Planning Commission Meeting at 8:00 p.m. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). _____________________________________________________________________________________________ City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2019 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2018\PC 19-014 - Mounds View School District - 1901 Lake Valentine Road\Memos Reports Page 1 of 7 Requested Action Mounds View Public Schools has applied for an Interim Use Permit (IUP) to allow the existing building on the property at 1901 Lake Valentine Road to be temporarily used as the weight room/fitness center for Mounds View High School. This property is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential and is part of the Mounds View High School Planned Unit Development. Background 1. Existing Site Conditions: The City Council approved a Planned Unit Development for Mounds View High School in May 2019. The approved PUD allowed for additions to the existing high school building and allowed multiple lots to be treated as a single development (see Figure 1). When the original PUD application was submitted, the Applicant intended to use the existing building at 1901 Lake Valentine Road for cold storage. A more intensive use of the building may be proposed at a later date. As a result, the City Council included the following as a condition of approval of the PUD: 7. Any use of the existing building on the on PID 21302334005 other than cold storage will require an amendment to the approved PUD. The existing structure shall comply with City Code Chapter 14 and any other use of the building shall meet all applicable codes. MEMORANDUM DATE: October 9, 2019 PC Agenda Item 3A TO: Planning Commission FROM: Mike Mrosla, Community Development Manager/City Planner Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant SUBECT: Planning Case # 19-014 – Public Hearing Required Applicant: ISD #621: Mounds View Public Schools Property Location: 1901 Lake Valentine Road Request: Interim Use Permit _____________________________________________________________________________________________ City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2019 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2018\PC 19-014 - Mounds View School District - 1901 Lake Valentine Road\Memos Reports Page 2 of 7 Figure 1 When construction of the high school improvements began, the School District realized they did not have an interim location for the weight room/fitness center. This room is generally used for fitness and weight training as part of the overall health and wellness curriculum. The school officials looked for a temporary location and decided to use the existing building at 1901 Lake Valentine Road. The School District worked with the Fire Marshall and building inspections staff to bring the space into conformance with building and life safety codes. During that time school and planning staff met to discuss approval options. As a result, the school district has submitted this application for an IUP. A temporary certificate of occupancy pending Planning Commission and City Council approval of the IUP. 2. Interim Use Permit (IUP) Process: Interim Use Permits are intended to allow uses that may be appropriate in a zoning district on a temporary basis, provided specific conditions are met. The IUP process is dictated by Section 1355.04, Subd. 7, of the City Code. According to this section, the purpose and intent of an IUP is: Weight Room Location _____________________________________________________________________________________________ City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2019 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2018\PC 19-014 - Mounds View School District - 1901 Lake Valentine Road\Memos Reports Page 3 of 7 1. To allow a use that is presently acceptable, but that with anticipated development or redevelopment, will not be acceptable in the future or will be replaced by a permitted or conditional use allowed within the respective zoning district. 2. To allow a use which is reflective of anticipated long range change to an area and which is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan provided that said use maintains harmony and compatibility with surrounding uses and is in keeping with the architectural character and design standards of existing uses and development. 3. Proposed Use: At this time, the applicant is applying for an IUP to allow the use of the existing building at 1901 Lake Valentine Road for a weight room/fitness center until October 1, 2020 (see Attachment A). The weight room is approximately 40’ by 80’ and is located in the southwest corner of the existing building. The remaining portion of the building is used for storage. Fire-rated sheetrock walls have been constructed around the weight room to meet building and fire code requirements. The room functions as part of Mounds View High School, so no additional parking spaces are required (see Figure 2 and Attachment B). No external changes to the building are proposed. Figure 2 The Applicant has provided a general statement of the future use of the building once the IUP has expired (see Attachment C). This use includes storage of vehicles and equipment. The School District will review and prioritize upgrades to the building and grounds as part of their long-term facility planning process. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2019 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2018\PC 19-014 - Mounds View School District - 1901 Lake Valentine Road\Memos Reports Page 4 of 7 Plan Evaluation 1. IUP Permit Evaluation – Section 1355.04, Subd. 7 Section 1355.04, Subd. 7, D lists the criteria to be used to evaluate an IUP. The City Council must make findings of fact for the 12 criteria listed. The applicant has addressed these finding in Attachment D. Suggested Findings of Fact Staff offers the following findings of fact for consideration: 1. The use is allowed as an interim use in the underlying zoning district and conforms to the zoning regulations; This site is a PUD with an underlying zoning of R-1. Schools are permitted as a CUP or a PUD in the R-1 district. The proposed interim use is an extension of the existing school. 2. Permission of the interim use will not impose additional costs on the public if it is necessary for the public to take the property in the future; There are no additional costs to the public. The use will be conducted in an existing building, and minimal improvements have been made. Further, there are no plans for public improvements in this area. 3. The use will not adversely impact nearby properties through nuisance, noise, dust, glare, or unsightliness, and will not otherwise adversely impact the health, safety, and welfare of the community; The use of this building for this purpose will not create a nuisance or impact the health, safety and welfare of the community. The proposed use is less intensive than the previous use as a bus garage. 4. The use will not adversely impact traffic and parking; The facility will only be used by students at Mounds View High School during the hours of approximately 7:00 AM to 5:00 PM. No additional parking will be required. 5. The use will not adversely impact implementation of future amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan; This site will be designated for Public & Institutional uses. This use is consistent with that designation. 6. The date or event that will terminate the use is identified with certainty; The Applicant has indicated this use will be discontinued upon completion of the weight room/fitness center in the high school building, or no later than October 1, 2020. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2019 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2018\PC 19-014 - Mounds View School District - 1901 Lake Valentine Road\Memos Reports Page 5 of 7 7. The applicant has signed a consent agreement agreeing that the applicant, owner, operator, tenant, and/or user has no entitlement to an extension of the Interim Use Permit; Upon approval of the IUP, the applicant will be asked to sign a consent agreement. 8. The user agrees to all conditions that the City Council deems appropriate for permission of the use including the requirement of appropriate financial surety to cover the cost of removing the interim use and any interim structures upon expiration of the interim use permit; Upon approval of the IUP, the applicant will be asked to sign a consent agreement. 9. There are no delinquent property taxes, special assessments, interest, or City utility fees due upon the subject parcel; There are no property taxes or other fees owed. 10. The term of the interim use does not exceed three (3) years; The interim use will be slightly less than one year from the date of approval. After October 1, 2020, the use of the building is intended for cold storage and vehicle parking. 11. The property has not been a recipient of a previous interim use permit. A property that has received an interim use permit for an interim use listed in 1320.05, Land Use Chart, shall not be eligible for another interim use permit of the same use; No previous interim use permits have been issued on this site. 12. Any special requirements in Section 1320 for a particular interim use are met. Section 1320 lists no special requirements for this use. Recommended Conditions of Approval Based on the submitted plans and findings of fact, staff recommends approval of Planning Case 19-014 for an Interim Use Permit at 1901 Lake Valentine Road be 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 the plans, as determined by the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council. 2. The area used for the weight room/fitness facility shall not exceed 3,200 square feet and shall be confined to the location shown on the building permit and plans on file at the City. 3. The facility shall be used for school classroom use only and shall not be open to the general public. 4. Hours of operation for this use are limited to 7:00 AM to 5:00 PM on Monday through Friday. No after-hours use is permitted. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2019 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2018\PC 19-014 - Mounds View School District - 1901 Lake Valentine Road\Memos Reports Page 6 of 7 5. No vehicles of any kind shall be parked or stored within the building while the IUP is in effect. 6. The Interim Use Permit shall be in effect until 5:00 PM on October 1, 2020. 7. No extension of the IUP shall be permitted without City Council approval. The Applicant is not entitled to an extension of this permit. 8. All weight room and classroom equipment must be removed from the facility by 5:00 PM on Friday, October 2, 2020. 9. Once this IUP expires, any use of the existing building at 1901 Lake Valentine Road (PID 21302334005) other than cold storage will require an amendment to the approved PUD. Any changes made to the building for the storage use will require a building permit. 10. Any violation of the conditions of this Interim Use Permit may result in revocation of the permit. Proposed Motion Language 1. Recommend Approval with Conditions: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 19- 014 for an Interim Use Permit at 1901 Lake Valentine Road, based on the findings of fact and submitted plans, as amended by the conditions in the October 9, 2019, Report to the Planning Commission. 2. Recommend Approval without Conditions: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 18-014 for an Interim Use Permit at 1901 Lake Valentine Road, based on the findings of fact and submitted plans in the October 9, 2019, Report to the Planning Commission. 3. Recommend Denial: Motion to recommend denial of Planning Case 19-014 for an Interim Use Permit at 1901 Lake Valentine Road, based on the following findings of fact: findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial and why those reasons cannot be mitigated. 4. Table: Motion to table Planning Case 19-014 for an Interim Use Permit at 1901 Lake Valentine Road for the following reasons: a specific reason and/or information request should be included with a motion to table. Notice and Public Comments Notice was published in the Arden Hills-Shoreview Bulletin on September 25, 2019. Notice was prepared by the City and mailed to property owners within 1000 feet of the subject property. Staff has not received any letters, e-mails, or telephone calls from property owners or residents in regards to this planning case. Deadline for Agency Actions The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on September 16, 2019. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, the City must act on this request by November 15, 2019 (60 _____________________________________________________________________________________________ City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2019 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2018\PC 19-014 - Mounds View School District - 1901 Lake Valentine Road\Memos Reports Page 7 of 7 days), unless the City provides the petitioner with written reasons for an additional 60 day review period. The City may, with the consent of the applicant, extend the review period beyond the initial 120 days. Attachments A. Application B. Location Map C. Building Plans D. Future Building Plans E. Applicant’s Findings of Fact Disclaimer: This m ap is intended for reference purposes only and is not a legally recorded map or survey. The City of Arden Hills shall not be liable for any damages or claims that arise due to accuracy,availability, use or misuse of the inform ation herein pursuant to MNStatute 466.03 Subd 21. Location Map Interstate 694 Lake Valentine Road Janet Court WB I694 To NB I35W N B I 3 5 W To E B I 6 9 4 Interstate 694 Tony Schmidt ± Project Are a Park and Open Space Subject Parcel §¨¦35W §¨¦694 £¤10 City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2019 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2019\19-012 - Presbyterian Homes - SP, VA\Memos Reports Page 1 of 6 MEMORANDUM DATE:October 9, 2019 PC Agenda Item 3B TO: Planning Commission Chair and Commissioners FROM: Joe Hartmann, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Planning Case #19-012 – No Public Hearing Required Applicant: Patrick McChesney, Presbyterian Homes Property Location: 3200 Lake Johanna Blvd Request: Site Plan Review Requested Action Patrick McChesney of Presbyterian Homes (“The Applicant”) is requesting site plan review for a proposed project on 3200 Lake Johanna Blvd (‘The Subject Property”) to install an Emergency Power Supply System (EPSS) on site. Background 1.Overview of Request Johanna Shores is multi-unit senior living community located on Lake Johanna Blvd and County Road D that has been operating continuously since 1955. The site is comprised of 410 units in a mix of independent senior apartments, assisted living units, memory care units, hospice units, and McKnight Care Center. The 22-acre parcel was approved for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) in 2010 under Resolution 10-067 to allow for greater flexibility with height and density requirements to accommodate the 410 units on the site. The Applicant is requesting a site plan review for the installation of a proposed EPSS to be located on a concrete pad outside the physical plant on the north side of the property. The Applicant indicated in their application that the proposal will replace two existing EPSSs that service the Subject Property with a single diesel-fueled EPSS. The existing equipment that would be replaced are a diesel-fueled EPSS with an underground tank and a natural gas-fueled EPSS. The two existing EPSS's are located inside a room adjacent to the physical plant on the rear on the building as shown on the image below. The proposed replacement EPSS would be located outside the physical plant on the north side of the campus adjacent to Sandeen Road. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2019 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2019\19-012 - Presbyterian Homes - SP, VA\Memos Reports Page 2 of 6 Under the state licensure requirements of a nursing home, a nursing home “shall be kept in a continuous state of good repair and operation with regard to the health, comfort, safety and well- being of the occupants in accordance with an established routine maintenance and repair program” including an emergency electrical service that “shall be operated and tested at frequent intervals”. (Chapter 4660.7800 Plant Operation and maintenance for Existing and New). The two existing EPSS systems are reportedly over 50 years old and are nearing the end of their serviceable lifetime. The replacement EPSS proposed will have a greater capacity than the combined total for the two existing EPSSs. Plan Evaluation Chapter 13, Zoning Regulations Review 1. District Provisions (R-4 Multiple Dwelling District) – Section 1320 Under the draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan which was approved by the City Council and awaiting approval from the Metropolitan Council, the Johanna Shores facility is located within an area guided towards the Public and Institutional Zoning District use. A senior multi-unit residential facility is a permitted used within this designation. The facility was approved under a PUD in 2010 with the R-4 Multiple Dwelling District guiding the designation. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2019 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2019\19-012 - Presbyterian Homes - SP, VA\Memos Reports Page 3 of 6 A. Site Plan An engineered concrete pad 9' X 19' X 12" will be poured in the location indicated on the plan. Four concrete bollards will be installed on the north side of the pad to protect the EPSS. The concrete pad will be located 60 feet from the nearest property line to the north and approximately194 feet from the nearest residential structure. The western edge of the property that is on Lake Johanna lies within an area FEMA designates has a high degree of flooding. The concrete pad is located further to the east in a zone designated with minimal risk of flooding. Distance to nearest residential units B. Screening and Fencing – Section 1325.05, Subd. 4 According to City Code, mechanical equipment requires screening to be “constructed and located so as to completely screen from view of adjacent streets and differing land uses.” The proposed EPSS will be located near the north of the site, adjacent to Sandeen Road. The site plan indicates that mechanical equipment will be screened with a chain link fence with beige fence weave privacy slats. It will be installed on all 4 sides of the concrete pad to a height of 11 ½ feet above grade. The EPSS is 11.5 feet tall from grade. Zoning code section 1325.05 Subd. 4, D, 7, states that in exceptional and unusual circumstances in residential districts a deviation from the maximum permitted residential fence height of six (6) feet may be permitted via site plan review and Planning Commission and City Council Approval. This situation is unique as the proposed EPSS is 11.5 feet tall and requires a tall fence for appropriate screening. The Applicant is proposing to construct a 10 to 12-foot-tall fence. As a condition of approval, the proposed fence shall be black vinyl- coated chain link. The intent of requiring the fence color to be black is to match the existing fencing onsite. In addition, the site is screened by landscaping. C. Noise Screens and fencing help minimize adverse impacts of public nuisances, such as noise from monthly emergency tests on the EPSS. State licensing requires the facility to test the EPSS monthly to ensure that the equipment is working properly. The Applicant indicated to staff that emergency testing of the EPSS would be confined to daytime hours. To help attenuate noise an air City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2019 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2019\19-012 - Presbyterian Homes - SP, VA\Memos Reports Page 4 of 6 intake silencer will be installed on the equipment by the manufacturer to reduce any noise with sound absorbing insulation. The Applicants stated in a letter from the manufacturer that the acoustical goal for the EPSS when the air intake silencer is in operation shall be 60-dBA at a 60.00-foot distance from the concrete pad, which is roughly to the property line on the north side of the site. Minnesota’s noise pollution rules (Minn. R. 7030.0040) are based on statistical calculations that quantify noise levels over a one-hour monitoring period. There are statutory limits for a residential location, which limits noise to 60 dBA during the daytime (7:00 a.m. – 10:00 p.m). This means that during a one-hour period of monitoring, daytime noise levels cannot exceed 65 dBA for more than 10 percent of the time or 60 dBA more than 50 percent of the time. Based on the reference materials provided by The Applicant, staff does not anticipate noise pollution issues with this proposal. As a condition of approval, the Applicant shall work with the City staff to mitigate any noise concerns if complaints are received. Additional Review Residential Building Inspector The Residential Building Inspector has reviewed the plans and has no additional comments at this time. A Building Permit will be required prior to any construction taking place. Public Works Director/City Engineer The Public Works Director/City Engineer has reviewed the plans and has no additional comments at this time. Findings of Fact 1. The Applicant is requesting site plan review for a proposed project at Johanna Shores Senior Living Facilities to install an Emergency Power Supply System (EPSS) on site. 2. The two existing EPSS systems are reportedly over 50 years old and are nearing the end of their serviceable lifetime. The replacement EPSS proposed will have a greater capacity than the combined total for the two existing EPSSs. 3. Under state licensure requirements, a nursing home shall be kept in a continuous state of good repair and operation including an emergency electrical service that shall be operated and tested at frequent intervals. 4. The Applicant indicated to staff that emergency testing of the EPSS would be confined to no more than one hour a month during day time hours. 5. The Subject Property is located within a PUD guided by the R-4 Zoning District and the location of the proposed EPSS is 60 feet from the nearest property line to the north and approximately 12 feet from the nearest structure, which meets all setback requirements for the Subject Property. 6. The concrete pad will be located further to the east in a zone designated with minimal risk of flooding. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2019 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2019\19-012 - Presbyterian Homes - SP, VA\Memos Reports Page 5 of 6 7. Mechanical equipment will be screened with a chain link fence with beige fence weave privacy slats, installed on all 4 sides of the concrete pad to a height of 11 ½ feet above grade to conceal the EPSS, which is 139" high. 8. To help attenuate noise an air intake silencer will be installed on the equipment by the manufacturer to reduce any noise with sound absorbing insulation. The Planning Commission must make a finding as to whether or not the proposed application would adversely affect the surrounding neighborhood or the community as a whole based on the aforementioned factors. Staff offers the following findings for consideration: Options and Motion Language Staff has provided the following options and motion language for this case. The Planning Commission should consider providing additional findings of fact as part of the motion to support their recommendation for approval or denial. • Recommend Approval with Conditions: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 19-012 for a Site Plan Review of 3200 Lake Johanna Blvd, based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, as amended by the three (5) conditions in the October 9th, 2019 Report to the Planning Commission: 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. All proposed fencing shall be black vinyl-coated chain link. 3. The structure shall conform to all other regulations in the City Code. 4. The Applicant shall work with the City staff to mitigate any noise concerns if complaints are received. 5. Monthly equipment testing shall occur weekdays between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. • Recommend Approval as Submitted: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 19- 012 for a site plan review of 3200 Lake Johanna Blvd, based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans in the October 9th, 2019 Report to the Planning Commission. • Recommend Denial: Motion to recommend denial of Planning Case 19-012 for a site plan review of 3200 Lake Johanna Blvd, based on the following findings: findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial and why those reasons cannot be mitigated. • Table: Motion to table Planning Case 19-012 for a site plan review of 3200 Lake Johanna Blvd: a specific reason and information request should be included with a motion to table. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2019 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2019\19-012 - Presbyterian Homes - SP, VA\Memos Reports Page 6 of 6 Public Comments Staff mailed public notices to all properties within 350 feet of the proposed property as per City procedure and no comments were received from the public. Deadline for Agency Actions The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on September 6, 2019. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, the City must act on this request by November 4, 2019 (60 days), unless the City provides the petitioner with written reasons for an additional 60-day review period. With consent of the applicant, the City may extend the review period beyond the initial 120 days. Attachments A. Application B. Location Map C. Submittal Documents Disclaimer: This m ap is intended for reference purposes only and is not a legally recorded map or survey. The City of Arden Hills shall not be liable for any damages or claims that arise due to accuracy,availability, use or misuse of the inform ation herein pursuant to MNStatute 466.03 Subd 21. Location Map Lake Johanna BoulevardShorewood DriveCounty Road D West Sandeen Road ± Park and Open Space Subject Parcel §¨¦35W §¨¦694 £¤10 City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2019 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2019\19-011 - 1314 Cannon Ave - Var\Memos Reports Page 1 of 6 MEMORANDUM DATE:October 9, 2019 PC Agenda Item 3C TO: Planning Commission Chair and Commissioners FROM: Joe Hartmann, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Planning Case #19-011 – No Public Hearing Required Applicant: Chris Grose, Northrup Builders Property Location: 1314 Cannon Avenue Request: Variance Requested Action Northrup Builders (the “Applicants”) have requested a variance in order to construct a four-season porch addition to the existing legal nonconforming single family detached property at 1314 Cannon Avenue (the “Subject Property”). Background City Staff received a building permit application for a request to build a four-season porch and deck addition at the Subject Property. Upon review by Planning Staff it was determined that the request would require a variance due to existing non-conforming side yard setbacks. The existing principal structure was built in 1963 and predates the current R-1 zoning code requirements. This is the first proposed addition and this is the first request for a variance at the Subject Property. 1.Overview of Request The applicants have requested a variance to construct a four-season poach on an existing nonconforming property. The existing principal structure on the subject property is setback nine (9) feet from the eastern property line and has combined total setback of 19 feet. However, the R-1 zoning district requires a minimum side yard setback of 10 feet and a minimum total combined of 25 feet for residential properties. The proposed addition will be constructed to maintain the same setbacks as the existing house or nine (9) feet from the eastern property line. The proposed addition will meet all other setback and lot coverage requirements. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2019 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2019\19-011 - 1314 Cannon Ave - Var\Memos Reports Page 2 of 6 Plan Evaluation Chapter 13, Zoning Regulations Review 1. District Provisions (R-1 Single Family Residential District) – Section 1320 A. Lot Size and Dimensions Data obtained from Ramsey County indicates the lot where the Subject Property is located has an area of approximately 15,246 square feet or .35 acres. The width of the lot is approximately 100 feet along Cannon Avenue and 150 feet long. This lot meets the minimum lot area and dimension requirements for the R-1 District. The Subject Parcels topography is relatively flat. B. Structure Setbacks – Flexibility Requested As stated previously the minimum side yard setback for principal structures in the R-1 District is 10 feet, and the total of both side yard setbacks shall be 25 feet or more. The existing principal structure on the property is nonconforming because it encroaches on both the east and west lot line as shown on the image below. The existing principal structure is setback nine (9) feet from the eastern property line and has combined total setback of 19 feet. The proposed addition would have the same nine (9) foot setback as the existing house. The minimum rear yard setback for principal structures in the R-1 District is 30 feet. The existing principal structure is setback approximately 85 feet from the rear property line. The proposed addition is approximately setback 71 feet from the rear property line. Staff inspected the City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2019 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2019\19-011 - 1314 Cannon Ave - Var\Memos Reports Page 3 of 6 neighborhood and there are several dwellings in the neighborhood that do not meet minimum setback requirements. C. Lot Coverage Properties in the R-1 District are permitted up to 25 percent structure coverage and must maintain a minimum landscape lot area of 65 percent. The property is currently in conformance with the Structure and Landscape Coverage Requirements for the R-1 District. The Subject Property will remain in conformance with the proposed addition as shown on the table below Lot Coverage Proposed R-1 Regulations Square Feet Percent Total Structure with addition 3,116 19% Maximum 25% Total Impervious Coverage 4,116 25% Maximum 35% Landscape Area 12,348 75% Minimum 65% Lot Size 15,246 s.f. 14,000 s.f. Table 1. Structure and Landscape Coverage Requirements for the R-1 District D. Floor Area Ratio The floor area ratio (FAR) is calculated by dividing the gross square footage of the dwelling by the lot area. In the R-1 District, the maximum FAR permitted is 0.3. According to the Applicant’s building permit application, the FAR would be 0.18. 2. Exceptions to the Minimum Requirements for All Districts – Section 1325.03 Section 1325.03, Subd. 2(D) of the Zoning Code allows for a nonconforming single-family dwelling to be expanded if certain provisions are met. A proposed addition is required to maintain all existing setback distances, and the addition cannot extend closer than 30 feet from the rear property line or 5 feet from a side property line. The addition is also required to be consistent with the existing structure in terms of exterior materials and roof design, and cannot result in any new nonconforming conditions on the property. The proposal will not extend the existing nonconforming structure closer to the side property line and meets the provisions expounded upon in Section 1325.03, Subd. 2(D) of the Zoning Code. Therefore, the remaining setback distances will be maintained. 3. Variance Requirements – Section 1355.04, Subd. 4 The applicants have requested a variance to construct a four-season poach on an existing nonconforming property. The Planning Commission will need to make a determination utilizing the following variance findings and criteria on whether there are practical difficulties with complying with the zoning regulations. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2019 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2019\19-011 - 1314 Cannon Ave - Var\Memos Reports Page 4 of 6 1. Purpose and Intent. The variance request shall comply with the purpose and intent of the provisions of the City’s Zoning Regulations and with the policies of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. The variance request would comply with the purpose and intent of the R-1 Zoning District and with the policies within the City’s Comprehensive Plan. 2. Practical Difficulties. The applicant for a variance shall establish that there are practical difficulties in complying with the provisions of the Arden Hills Zoning Regulations. The term “Practical Difficulties” as used in the granting of a variance means: a. Reasonable Use. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed addition is a reasonable use of the property. b. Unique Circumstances. The plight of the property owner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. Conditions of the property present a unique circumstance as the house was constructed prior to the establishment of the existing zoning code and does not meet current setback standards. c. Character of Neighborhood. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The proposed addition will not alter the character of the neighborhood and is consistent with the other dwellings in the neighborhood. 3. Economic Consideration. Economic consideration alone does not constitute a practical difficulty. The proposed variance does is not based on economic consideration. 4. Access to Sunlight. Inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems shall be considered a practical difficulty. A solar energy system is not proposed. However, the proposed addition would not impact the ability to construct a solar energy system onsite or on an adjoining property. Additional Review Residential Building Inspector The Residential Building Inspector has reviewed the plans and has no additional comments at this time. A Building Permit will be required prior to any construction taking place. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2019 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2019\19-011 - 1314 Cannon Ave - Var\Memos Reports Page 5 of 6 Public Works Director/City Engineer The Public Works Director/City Engineer has reviewed the plans and has no additional comments at this time. Findings of Fact The Planning Commission must make a finding as to whether or not the proposed application would adversely affect the surrounding neighborhood or the community as a whole based on the aforementioned factors. Staff offers the following findings for consideration: General Findings: 1. The property at 1314 Cannon Avenue is located in the R-1 Single Family Residential Zoning District. 2. The existing single-family residential dwelling was built prior to the existing zoning code and is a nonconforming structure because it encroaches into the required side yard setbacks on either side of the property. 3. The property owners have requested a variance in order to construct an addition that would remain flush with the side of the dwelling and would maintain the same setback as the existing structure 4. The proposed addition would meet all other minimum setback requirements for the R-1 District. 5. The proposed addition meets the minimum lot coverage requirements, maximum building height requirement, and floor area ratio requirement for the R-1 District, as indicated by the plans submitted by the Applicant. 6. The proposed development would not encroach on any flood plains, wetlands, or easements. 7. The proposed development is not expected to impact any significant trees on the property. Options and Motion Language Staff has provided the following options and motion language for this case. The Planning Commission should consider providing additional findings of fact as part of the motion to support their recommendation for approval or denial. Conditions may be imposed on granting of variances if those conditions are directly related to and bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. • Recommend Approval with Conditions: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 19-011 for a Variance at 1314 Cannon Avenue, based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, as amended by the three (4) conditions in the October 9, 2018 Report to the Planning Commission: 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 City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2019 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2019\19-011 - 1314 Cannon Ave - Var\Memos Reports Page 6 of 6 the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council. 2. An approved Building Permit shall be required prior to commencement of construction. 3. The structure shall conform to all other regulations in the City Code. 4. The finish of the proposed addition shall complement the existing structure. • Recommend Approval as Submitted: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 19- 011 for a Variance at 1314 Cannon Avenue, based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans in the October 9, 2018 Report to the Planning Commission. • Recommend Denial: Motion to recommend denial of Planning Case 19-011 for a Variance at 1314 Cannon Avenue, based on the following findings: findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial and why those reasons cannot be mitigated. • Table: Motion to table Planning Case 19-011 for a Variance at 1314 Cannon Avenue: a specific reason and information request should be included with a motion to table. Notification Although a variance does not require a public hearing, a notice of the Planning Commission was mailed to all properties within 350 feet of the subject property. Staff has not received any letters, e-mails, or telephone calls from property owners or occupants concerning this planning case. Deadline for Agency Actions The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on September 5, 2019. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, the City must act on this request by November 4, 2019 (60 days), unless the City provides the petitioner with written reasons for an additional 60-day review period. With consent of the applicant, the City may extend the review period beyond the initial 120 days. Attachments A. Land Use Application B. Location Map C. Building Permit Disclaimer: This m ap is intended for reference purposes only and is not a legally recorded map or survey. The City of Arden Hills shall not be liable for any damages or claims that arise due to accuracy,availability, use or misuse of the inform ation herein pursuant to MNStatute 466.03 Subd 21. Location Map Highway 51Tiller Lane Dunlap Street NorthCannon AvenueHighway 51PARK ± Park and Open Space Subject Parcel §¨¦35W §¨¦694 £¤10 City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2019 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2019\19-013 1932 County Road E2 Var\Memos Reports Page 1 of 7 MEMORANDUM DATE:October 9, 2019 PC Agenda Item 3D TO: Planning Commission Chair and Commissioners FROM: Joe Hartmann, Associate Planner Mike Mrosla, Community Development Manager/City Planner SUBJECT: Planning Case #19-013 – No Public Hearing Required Applicant: Gary and Julie Gronquist Property Location: 1932 County Road E W Request: Variance Requested Action Gary and Julie Gronquist (“The Applicants”) have requested a variance in order to construct a detached garage adjacent to their existing driveway located on New Brighton Road. The subject property is located at 1932 County Road E W (“Subject Property”). Background 1.Overview of Request The Subject Property is a single family detached dwelling with an attached garage and driveway facing County Road E W. In August 2000 a second driveway was constructed on New Brighton Road along with an associated accessory structure (shed). At the time, there were no restrictions on driveways in the R-2 District. However, on November 31, 2000, the City Council approved amended language to the City Zoning Ordinance in regards to the definition of a driveway on single family residential properties. Because the driveway on the Subject Property was built and approved prior to the change in language, the property has been legally non-conforming. The Applicants are requesting a variance to build a detached garage on the Subject Property facing New Brighton Avenue. The proposed detached garage would replace the existing accessory structure (shed) onsite. The Subject Property is located on a corner lot located within the R-2 district, each yard facing a public street is considered to be a front yard with a front yard setback of 40 feet. The Applicant’s proposed detached garage would be setback 23 or encroach 17 feet into the front yard setback. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2019 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2019\19-013 1932 County Road E2 Var\Memos Reports Page 2 of 7 The area that is 40 feet from the curb facing New Brighton Avenue on the Subject Property is underneath a power line. A variance would allow the residents to build the garage closer to the curb, which would avoid relocating the power line and would preserve an existing large tree onsite. Staff reviewed the R-2 district and found numerous other accessory structures located within the 40-foot setback, including the adjacent property to the south of the subject property. Plan Evaluation Chapter 13, Zoning Regulations Review 1.District Provisions (R-2 Single Family Residential District) – Section 1320 A.Lot Size and Dimensions The parcel is approximately 0.40 acres or 17,358 square feet in area. In an R-2 residential district, the minimum lot size is 11,000 square feet. The lot is approximately 155 feet by 115 feet and meets the minimum width and length requirements for a property within the R-2 District. B.Structure Setbacks - Flexibility Requested The principal structure and attached garage is set back approximately 40 feet from County Road E W and New Brighton Avenue. It meets the minimum setback for the remaining side at 10 feet from the property line to the east and the 30 foot rear yard setback. If the detached garage were approved with a variance, all other applicable setbacks on the Subject Property would be met. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2019 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2019\19-013 1932 County Road E2 Var\Memos Reports Page 3 of 7 As per the documents submitted by the Applicants, the proposed accessory structure would meet the minimum setback requirements for 10 feet on the side and rear yards. The proposed structure would be setback facing New Brighton Avenue by 27 feet, meaning that it would only encroach 13 feet. As previously stated, numerous properties in the R-2 district with detached garages don’t meet setback requirements, including the property located directly to the south of the subject parcel. Staff did submit the plans to Ramsey County for review as New Brighton Road is a County Road and County staff did not have any concerns. C.Lot Coverage Lot Coverage Proposed R-2 RegulationsSquare Feet Percent Total Structure 3,618 20% Maximum 25% Total Impervious Coverage 5,318 31% Maximum 35% Landscape Area 12,040 69% Minimum 65% Lot Size 17,358 s.f. 11,000 s.f. As depicted in the chart, the proposed detached garage addition would not significantly impact the lot coverage requirements in the R-2 District for the Subject Property. D.Design Standards City Code Section 1325.01 requires that “accessory structures be compatible in appearance and material used with the principal structure served by the accessory structure”. According to the plans submitted by the Applicant, the proposed structure is intended to complement the existing dwelling located onsite. 2.Exceptions to the Minimum Requirements for All Districts – Section 1325.03 3.Tree Preservation – Section 1355.055 According to the Applicants, there is a significant tree in the rear year located approximately 40 feet from the front yard setback facing New Brighton Avenue. If the Applicants were to build the garage meeting the setback requirements for an R-2 residential property, the significant tree would have to be removed and replaced as per the requirements in City Code Section 1355.055. 4.Variance Requirements – Section 1355.04, Subd. 4 The applicants have requested a variance to construct a detached accessory structure that would encroach into the front yard setback by 13 feet. The Planning Commission will need to make a determination utilizing the following variance findings and criteria on whether there are practical difficulties with complying with the zoning regulations. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2019 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2019\19-013 1932 County Road E2 Var\Memos Reports Page 4 of 7 1.Purpose and Intent. The variance request shall comply with the purpose and intent of the provisions of the City’s Zoning Regulations and with the policies of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. The variance request would comply with the purpose and intent of the R-2 Zoning District and with the policies within the City’s Comprehensive Plan. 2.Practical Difficulties. The applicant for a variance shall establish that there are practical difficulties in complying with the provisions of the Arden Hills Zoning Regulations. The term “Practical Difficulties” as used in the granting of a variance means: a.Reasonable Use. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed addition is a reasonable use of the property. b.Unique Circumstances. The plight of the property owner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. The Subject Property is located on a corner lot at the intersection of County Road E W and New Brighton Road. Corner lots with yards facing a public street are considered to be a front yard and any structures shall be setback of 40 feet from the property line. On non- corner lots the rear and side yard setback for accessory structures is 10 feet. However, many other properties zoned R-2 encroach upon the 40-foot setback. The Applicant is requesting to encroach 13 feet, where other properties encroach 30 or more feet into the front yard setback. c.Character of Neighborhood. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The proposed addition will not alter the character of the neighborhood and is consistent with the other dwellings in the neighborhood. The Applicants indicated to staff that their neighbors on surrounding properties have voiced their support and do not believe that granting a variance would negatively impact them. In addition, the Applicant work with the neighbor to the south on locating their propose structure so it would be screen by the existing garage on the adjacent property. 3.Economic Consideration. Economic consideration alone does not constitute a practical difficulty. The proposed variance is not based on economic consideration. 4.Access to Sunlight. Inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems shall be considered a practical difficulty. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2019 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2019\19-013 1932 County Road E2 Var\Memos Reports Page 5 of 7 A solar energy system is not proposed. However, the proposed addition would not impact the ability to construct a solar energy system onsite or on an adjoining property. Additional Review Residential Building Inspector The Residential Building Inspector has reviewed the plans and had no additional comments at this time. A Building Permit will be required prior to any construction taking place. Public Works Director/City Engineer The Public Works Director/City Engineer has reviewed the plans and had no additional comments at this time. Ramsey County Ramsey County for reviewed the proposed plans as New Brighton Road is a county road and had no additional comments. Findings of Fact The Planning Commission must make a finding as to whether or not the proposed application would adversely affect the surrounding neighborhood or the community as a whole based on the aforementioned factors. Staff offers the following findings for consideration: General Findings: 1.The property at 1932 County Road E is located in the R-2 Single Family Residential Zoning District. 2.The existing driveway on the property facing New Brighton Avenue is legally nonconforming because it was built prior to the ordinance amendment pertaining to driveways. 3.The property owners have requested a variance in order to construct a garage on the driveway that would encroach on the front yard setback facing New Brighton Avenue. 4.The proposed garage would meet all other minimum setback requirements for the R-2 District. 5.The proposed garage would meet the minimum lot coverage requirements, maximum building height requirement for the R-2 District, as indicated by the plans submitted by the Applicant. 6.The proposed development would not encroach on any flood plains, wetlands, or easements. 7. The proposed development is not expected to impact any significant trees on the property. Variance Findings: 8.The variance request would comply with the purpose and intent of the R-2 Zoning District and with the policies within the City’s Comprehensive Plan. 9. The proposed addition is a reasonable use of the property. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2019 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2019\19-013 1932 County Road E2 Var\Memos Reports Page 6 of 7 10. The Subject Property is located is a corner lot at the intersection of County Road E W and New Brighton Road. Corner lots with yards facing a public street is considered to be a front yard and any structures shall be setback of 40 feet from the property line. On non- corner lots the rear and side yard setback for accessory structures is 10 feet. However, many other properties zoned R-2 encroach upon the 40-foot setback. The Applicant is requesting to encroach 17 feet, where other properties encroach 30 or more feet into the front yard setback. 11.The proposed addition will not alter the character of the neighborhood and is consistent with the other dwellings in the neighborhood. The Applicants indicated to staff that their neighbors on surrounding properties have voiced their support and do not believe that granting a variance would negatively impact them. In addition, the Applicant work with the neighbor to the south on locating their propose structure so it would be screen by the existing garage on the adjacent property 12. The proposed variance is not based on economic consideration. 13.A solar energy system is not proposed. However, the proposed addition would not impact the ability to construct a solar energy system onsite or on an adjoining property. Options and Motion Language Staff has provided the following options and motion language for this case. The Planning Commission should consider providing additional findings of fact as part of the motion to support their recommendation for approval or denial. •Recommend Approval with Conditions: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 19-013 for a Variance at 1932 County Road E W, based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, as amended by the three (3) conditions in the October 9, 2019 Report to the Planning Commission: 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. A Building Permit shall be issued prior to commencement of construction. 3. The structure shall conform to all other regulations in the City Code. 4. The proposed accessory structure finish shall complement the existing structure onsite •Recommend Approval as Submitted: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 19- 013 for a Variance at 1932 County Road E W, based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans in the May 9, 2018 Report to the Planning Commission. •Recommend Denial: Motion to recommend denial of Planning Case 19-013 for a Variance at 1932 County Road E W, based on the following findings: findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial and why those reasons cannot be mitigated. •Table: Motion to table Planning Case 19-013 for a Variance at 1932 County Road E W: a specific reason and information request should be included with a motion to table. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2019 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2019\19-013 1932 County Road E2 Var\Memos Reports Page 7 of 7 Notice Although a variance does not require a public hearing, a public meeting notice was prepared by the City and mailed to properties within 350 feet of the subject property. Public Comments Staff received three public comments which have been attached to this document. Deadline for Agency Actions The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on September 9, 2019. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, the City must act on this request by November 8, 2019 (60 days), unless the City provides the petitioner with written reasons for an additional 60-day review period. With consent of the applicant, the City may extend the review period beyond the initial 120 days. Attachments A.Land Use Application and Variance Request Letter B.Location and Aerial Maps C.Site Photograph D.Proposed Building Plans E.Public Comments 013 Disclaimer: This m ap is intended for reference purposes only and is not a legally recorded map or survey. The City of Arden Hills shall not be liable for any damages or claims that arise due to accuracy,availability, use or misuse of the inform ation herein pursuant to MNStatute 466.03 Subd 21. Location Map Grant RoadNew Brighton RoadCounty Road E West Tony Schmidt ± §¨¦35W §¨¦694 £¤10 New Brighton Park and Open Space Subject Parcel � �HILLS1245 W Hwy 96 * Arden Hills MN 55112 Phone 651.792.7800 * Fax 651.634.5137 Email: CD@cilvofardenhiHs.org Licensing Requirements: Residential contractors must provide a copy of their current state license, or hold a current City contractor's license. Commercial Contractors must be city licensed, annually. Property Information Property Address: /93 Owner Name: Permit# __________ _ BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION [Plan Required) Date Plan Submitted: Date Applicant Notified: Bldg./Suite/Location (commercial projects only): Owner Phone Number: Applicant Type: D Primary Owner (Owners Affidavit Form Required) �ontractor; License # � /C,3'i □Verified Company Name (contractors only): ,::.�t; □Commercial □New □Public □RemodelV Single family □Replacement � Accessory Structure Does Project Require Lead Remediation? 0 YES Addition Basement Bathroom Deck If NO Explain: EPA Certified Lead Renovation Firm Yes / No Shed Home Swimming Pool Kitchen Tenant Finish Office Warehouse Verified NO f; ... $nx ... Tvfii!!.l=- List-All Special Approvals (i.e. variances, CUP's, etc.) or Details of this Project: Proposed Structure Details: Width: ,3,o I Height: 11t '-1 '-Jo 1341,.. Dimensions and size of the lot (in square feet): Length: 24 1 Proposed Impervious Coverage -*** Required for exterior work*** Existing Proposed House: 19 ea z,.sq.ft. LC/'2Z. Garage (Attached): �sq.ft. &::c, Garage (s) (Detached): -sq.ft. tJI_o Decks: 55:'o sq.ft. 550 Driveway: IS-3 2.. sq.ft. lt.tfto Walkways/Stoops: 1S3 sq.ft. 12.<::> Patio (s): sq.ft. 0 Sheds: lfao sq.ft. 0 Pools: sq.ft. 0 Expected Completion Date: /-/-LO Project Value: (including labor and materials) Total New Sq.Ft.: 0 $ en 5'7,ooc- Total Impervious Coverage: 6.J/8_sq.ft. sq.ft. Percentage of Impervious Coverage on Lot (impervious coverage/lot sq.ft. area X 100): 3:) % sq.ft. Proposed Floor Area and Floor Area Ratio (FAR): sq.ft. Floor Area. The sum of the gross horizontal area of all floors of a building as measured in square feet from the exterior walls, but not sq.ft. including decks; any space where the average floor-to-ceiling height sq.ft. is less than six feet; attached or detached garages; and other detached accessory structures (1305.04 Subd. 69). sq.ft. 3182... sq.ft. Total gross floor area: sq.ft. sq.ft. Floor Area Ratio (gross floor area/lot area): • IS