HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-03-2020 PC Chair: Address:
Nick GehrigIt 1245 W Highway 96
Arden Hills MN 55112
Marcie Jeffer s
Commissioners: ARQEN
HILLS Phone:
Steven Jones 651-792-7800
James Lambeth Planning Commission
Subbaya Website;
Subramanian June 3, 2020
6'30 www.cityofardenhills.org
Paul Vijums p.m.
Kurt Weber City Hall
Jonathan Wicklund
Clayton
Zimmerman
Council Liaison:
Steve Scott
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.
This meeting can be accessed remotely by joining via
Zoom
To join the Zoom Meeting via your computer, click this link (or copy and paste
it into a new browser): https://us02web.zoom.us/j/82651657794
This meeting will be streamed live on local Cable Channel 16 and available for playback on our
website
Agenda
CALL TO ORDER
1. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
2.A. May 6, 2020 Planning Commission Regular Meeting
Documents:
MINUTES - MAY 6, 2020.PDF
3. PLANNING CASES
3.A. Planning Case 20-003 - 3246 New Brighton Road - Preliminary Plat/Variance
Request(Public Hearing Required)
Mike Mrosla, Community Development Manager/City Planner
Documents:
MEMO.PDF
ATTACHMENT A- LAND USE APPLICATION.PDF
ATTACHMENT B - LOCATION MAP.PDF
ATTACHMENT C - VARIANCE REQ LETTER.PDF
ATTACHMENT D - 11 X17 PLAN SET.PDF
ATTACHMENT E - PUBLIC COMMENTS.PDF
3.B. Planning Case 20-005 - 2 Pine Tree Drive North - Master Planned Unit
Development Request, Preliminary And Final Plat (Public Hearing Required)
Mike Mrosla, Community Development Manager/City Planner
Documents:
MEMO.PDF
ATTACHMENT A-APPLICATION.PDF
ATTACHMENT B - LOCATION MAP.PDF
ATTACHMENT C - ANDERSON CENTER SUBDIVISION 1.PDF
ATTACHMENT D - TRAILS.PDF
ATTACHMENT E -11X17 PLANS.PDF
ATTACHMENT F -PUBLIC COMMENTS.PDF
ATTACHMENT G -ENGINEERING COMMENTS.PDF
4. UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS
5. COMMENTS AND REPORTS
6. ADJOURNMENT
ADJOURN
A quorum of the City Council may be
present at this meeting.
,!It I
DRAFT
-- iVEN HILLS
Approved:
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA
PLANNING COMMISSION
WEDNESDAY, MAY 6, 2020
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 Marcie Jefferys, Steven Jones, James Lambeth,
Subbaya Subramanian, Paul Vijums, and Jonathan Wicklund.
Absent: Commissioners Kurtis Weber and Clayton Zimmerman.
Also present were: Community Development Manager Mike Mrosla, Associate Planner Joe
Hartmann, and Councilmember Steve Scott.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA—MAY 6, 2020
Chair Gehrig stated the agenda will stand as amended changing Planning Case 3B to Planning
Case 20-004.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
April 15, 2020 Planning Commission Regular Meeting
Commissioner Lambeth moved, seconded by Commissioner Jefferys, to approve the April
15, 2020, Planning Commission Regular Meeting as presented. A roll call vote was taken.
The motion carried unanimously (7-0).
PLANNING CASES
A. Planning Case 20-008; 3244 Sandeen Road — Variance Request—No Public Hearing
Required
Associate Planner Hartmann stated the Applicants are requesting a variance to increase the
FAR of their single-family detached dwelling on the Subject Property from 0.30 to 0.34. The
Applicants were previously approved for a front yard setback variance at the January 27th 2020
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION—May 6, 2020 2
City Council meeting. The Subject Property is currently a vacant lot, zoned R-2, Single and Two
Family Residential District, and is guided as Low Density Residential on the land use plan.
Associate Planner Hartmann reported according to the Applicants' narrative submitted as a
part of their application, the home has been designed in such a way that it can capture the
additional 396 sq. ft. that the Applicant requests without changing the envelope or appearance of
the home from the exterior; which could be built by right. The Applicants are requesting to
incorporate more livable space above the garage and in the basement. The proposed spaces
would be otherwise used for storage and would meet applicable building codes to not be included
within the FAR Calculation. Without the variance the space above the garage would be
accessible from the garage via a drop down stair. There will no changes required to the exterior
of the property to meet their request for a greater FAR.
Associate Planner Hartmann explained the Planning Commission is being asked to determine
if a variance request for flexibility with the FAR requirement should be approved. The sketches
that have been submitted show that the extra livable space would be wholly within the principle
structure. The evaluation of the proposal should be based on the District Provisions in Section
1320 and the Requirements for a Variance in Section 1355.04, Subd. 4.
Associate Planner Hartmann reviewed the surrounding area, the Plan Evaluation and provided
the Findings of Fact for review:
1. City Staff received a land use application for a variance request to increase the allowable
FAR on a single family dwelling at the Subject Property 3244 Sandeen Road.
2. A single-family detached dwelling is a permitted use in the R-2 district.
3. The Subject Property is non-conforming with the R-2 districts standards for minimum lot
width and area requirements.
4. The proposed additional floor area would be below grade and wholly within the principal
structure of the house.
5. The proposed development of the subject parcel would conform to all other requirements
and standards of the R-2 district.
6. A variance may be granted if enforcement of a provision in the zoning ordinance would
cause the landowner practical difficulties.
7. Variances are only permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and
intent of the ordinance.
Associate Planner Hartmann stated staff recommends approval of Planning Case 20-008 for a
Variance at 3244 Sandeen Road, based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, as
amended by the conditions below:
1. A Building Permit shall be issued prior to commencement of construction.
2. The proposed building shall conform to all other standards and regulations in the City
Code.
Associate Planner Hartmann reviewed the options available to the Planning Commission on
this matter:
1. Recommend Approval with Conditions
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION—May 6, 2020 3
2. Recommend Approval as Submitted
3. Recommend Denial
4. Table
Chair Gehrig opened the floor to Commissioner comments.
Commissioner Jeffreys asked if the City has previously approved a FAR request over .3 in the
past.
Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla stated it was his understanding the
City has received one other request for a FAR variance and this was for another unique lot. He
explained the majority of lots in the City meet all zoning requirements, but older lakefront lots
were unique.
Commissioner Jeffreys questioned if an architect would be aware of the City's FAR
requirements.
Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla deferred this question to the
architect.
Andrew Peterson, architect for the Applicants, explained he understood the requirements ahead
of time. However, he stated it took time to lay out the space and to fully understand how the
Applicants would want the building to be laid out.
Commissioner Jones commented on the Met Council information that was provided to the
Commission. He supported the City reviewing how FAR was measured. He noted this was the
third time this home has been before the Commission. He inquired if the Applicants were
planning to raise the floor in the basement while also adding space above the garage.
Mr. Peterson explained this was a new construction home and the house has been designed with
flexibility to where additional space could be captured. He indicated the space above the garage
and in the lower level could accommodate the therapy room. He reported if the FAR variance
was not approved, he would need to revise the plans.
Commissioner Jones questioned if the .34 FAR included both the basement and space above the
garage.
Mr. Peterson stated nothing has been approved yet. He commented in the lower level the floor
would be raised for a crawl space. He indicated the exterior envelope of the home would not be
altered if the FAR variance was not approved. He described how the home was built into a
hillside and a portion would be useable space and the remainder would be crawl space. He
reported the crawl space had to not be livable space because of the City's FAR requirements.
Commissioner Lambeth commented on the information that was provided to the Commission
in November of 2019. He asked what the lot size was for this property noting there were three
different numbers included in the materials. He discussed the history of this Planning Case noting
the previous requests from the Applicants. He understood the Applicants were requesting extra
space for special needs programming for their child, but indicated the Applicants were now
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION—May 6, 2020 4
requesting even more space than was previously approved on a 9,400 square foot lot. He stated
the Applicants were proposing to increase the FAR from .36 to .4. He explained the new plan
includes some questionable data. He reviewed the lot area numbers further and expressed
concerns that the facts were a moving target. He questioned why the City would assign an FAR
calculation to this lot that does not meet the square footage minimums of the zoning
requirements.
Associate Planner Hartmann referenced the packet from November and noted a different
architect had provided the City with those FAR numbers. He noted the size of the lot was
estimated to be 9,400 square feet. He reported the current Applicant has gone with a different
architect and a certified survey of the lot was provided to the City stating the lot was 9,900
square feet in size. He reported this number was more accurate than the previous information
taken from an aerial photo.
Commissioner Lambeth stated it was important for the City to have a clear lot size in order to
have this number as the denominator for the FAR equation. He feared that at this time the City
had three or four numbers out there.
Associate Planner Hartmann clarified the correct and most accurate number was 9,900 square
feet based on the certified survey.
Further discussion ensued regarding the change in the plans.
Commissioner Lambeth expressed concern with the fact revised, detailed plans had not been
provided to the Planning Commission.
Mr. Peterson commented a simple plan diagram had been provided to staff detailing the
locations of the two spots where additional space would be used if the FAR variance were
approved. He explained elevations had been provided to staff.
Commissioner Lambeth stated it was concerning that this information was not provided to the
Commission. He reported the Commission was running blind and had no actual revised
drawings to review.
Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla apologized for not having this
information in the presentation. He noted he just received the information from the architect via
email this afternoon. He stated the diagram shows the additional FAR was in the basement and
above the garage. He explained if the FAR variance was not approved by the Commission these
spaces would remain storage.
Commissioner Lambeth asked if the change was to move the rehabilitation space to above the
garage.
Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla reported the plans before the
Commission were different from the previous plans.
Commissioner Lambeth questioned if there was any finished area adjacent to the garage in the
lowest level.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION—May 6, 2020 5
Mr. Peterson explained there was a very small amount of finished square footage on the entry
level which would act as an entry/mudroom and houses stairs to go up to the main level, along
with a mechanical room.
Commissioner Vijums asked how basements that don't meet minimum ceiling height was
considered within the FAR requirements.
Associate Planner Hartmann discussed the Minnesota State Building Code Requirements. He
reported the minimum was seven feet.
Commissioner Vijums questioned if the crawl space was less than seven feet.
Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla stated according to the applicant this
was correct.
Commissioner Vijums inquired where the therapy room would be located.
Mr. Peterson indicated the occupational therapy room would be located either above the garage
or in the lower level. He stated his clients have yet to make this decision. It was noted the
exterior of the building would not change if this space were used for occupational therapy.
Chair Gehrig reported this Planning Case does not require a Public Hearing. However, he
opened the meeting for public comments.
Steven Campbell, 3248 Sandeen Road, stated he lives adjacent to the property in question. He
noted he submitted a letter on behalf of the residents in the neighborhood that have concerns
about the property. He explained he attended the previous Planning Commission meetings. He
indicated this was a unique lot that was non-conforming. He stated he had concerns with how
the FAR was being calculated. He expressed concern with the fact he has not been given
information from the City when it has been requested. He reported the proposed home was much
too large for the size of the property and he recommended the Planning Commission deny the
variance request.
Jim Day, 3242 Sandeen Road, stated he lived south of the property in question. He discussed
State Code and reported in order for basement space to not be counted as livable it had to be
under six feet in height. He believed the square footage on the proposed home was too high. He
was of the opinion a variance was not justified simply because the applicant had not changed the
envelope of the home. He indicated the proposed home would be three stories from the street and
reported all other homes on Sandeen Road were one or two stories. He stated the proposed home
would be inconsistent with the character of the neighborhood. He recommended the Planning
Commission deny the variance request.
Commissioner Zimmerman stated he was listening to the meeting as an alternate.
Richard Priore, applicant, explained the house as presented meet all City Code requirements.
He indicated he could build this home tomorrow without needing a variance. However, because
he was requesting additional space for a therapy room, he needed to come before the Planning
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION—May 6, 2020 6
Commission. He questioned why the neighbors were struggling with the additional space given
the fact the envelope of the home would not change. He understood the neighbors wanted to
preserve the neighborhood, but stated he would be dramatically improving the lot. He explained
the height of the house was within City Code. He stated he was having a hard time
understanding why the neighbors were objecting to the project when the home would be built per
the plans whether or not the FAR was approved.
Chair Gehrig thanked the public for their comments and brought the discussion back to the
Planning Commissioners.
Chair Gehrig explained the request before the Commission was for a FAR variance. He
reported the home itself did not require any variances to City Code. He stated because the
exterior footprint of the home would not be increased and because the additional space was for a
good use, he supported the proposed request.
Commissioner Jones agreed with Chair Gehrig and reiterated that the structure itself required no
variances to City Code.
Commissioner Jeffreys explained she had concerns with the fact the home plans were of a new
design. She indicated if the home had been built with a .3 FAR it would have a smaller envelope
and would not have the capacity for the therapy room.
Chair Gehrig reported the home could be built per the plans today and the extra spaces could be
used as storage. However, the applicant was asking to convert the space into useable space in
order to provide a therapy room for their special needs son.
Commissioner Wicklund stated he supported the FAR increase. He believed this was a
reasonable request and the lot was unique. He explained he could support the FAR increase
because the essential character of the property would not be altered because the envelope meets
City Code.
Commissioner Lambeth reported he did not believe the Commission could review and approve
this request because it did not have adequate information. He believed the Commission needed
to be able to review a complete package that demonstrates compliance with all applicable State,
County and local statutes and codes.
Chair Gehrig indicated the Planning Commission's scope was to review variances requests per
City Code. He explained the Commission does not review every building request if there were
no variance requests.
Commissioner Lambeth stated he could support this variance in order to move forward but
noted in doing this without the required documentation was a concern to him.
Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla apologized to the Planning
Commission for not including the house elevations within the packet. He noted this information
was included in the information that was emailed within the PowerPoint presentation. He stated
if the Commission believes they need additional time to review the elevations the item could be
tabled.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION—May 6, 2020 7
Chair Gehrig thanked Commissioner Lambeth for clarifying the disconnect. He asked how the
Commission would like to proceed.
Commissioner Jones stated he supported moving the item forward.
Commissioner Wicklund was in agreement.
Commissioner Wicklund moved and Commissioner Jones seconded a motion to
recommend approval of Planning Case 20-008 for a Variance at 3244 Sandeen Road based
on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, as amended by the two (2) conditions in the
May 6, 2020, report to the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Lambeth stated he supported this project moving forward. However, he
requested in the future that all variance requests include all information submitted by the
applicant so the item can be properly considered by the Planning Commission.
A roll call vote was taken. The motion carried unanimously (7-0).
B. Planning Case 20-004; 1741 Venus Avenue — Variance Requested — No Public
Hearing Required
Associate Planner Hartmann stated the Applicants are requesting a variance to replace a deck
in the front yard of their single-family detached dwelling on the Subject Property that also serves
as the front door entrance to the house given the unique topography of the parcel. The front yard
property line is 40 feet from the house and thus the proposed deck is 28 feet from the property
line. The Subject Property is zoned R-1, Single Residential District and is guided as Low Density
Residential on the land use plan.
Associate Planner Hartmann reported the Applicants are proposing to replace the design
instead of repairing the current structure. According to the Applicants' narrative submitted as a
part of their application, the proposed plan is to replace the deck and walkway which is original
to the house. The decking is failing due to rotting wood after over 50 years in service and some
of the current two-by-four support structure is not up to current state building code standards for
decks.
Associate Planner Hartmann explained the Applicants argue that the deck is an essential
feature of the house, as it provides the only access to the front door and the plan they propose
does not extend any farther toward the front lot line than the current deck and adjoining stone
stairs, nor is the proposed deck any higher than the current deck, which would preserve
neighborhood character. The proposal also removes a section of the deck to the west of the front
door which partially blocks of the egress window on the ground level. The Applicants' plan
increases the area in front of the front door to make the front door more accessible and to create a
space in the front of the house they argue will support neighborly engagement.
Associate Planner Hartmann commented the Planning Commission is being asked to
determine if a variance request for flexibility with the front setback requirement should be
approved for the deck and "bridge" walkway. The sketches that have been submitted show that
the replacement walkway would be the same size and length as the current walkway, but the
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION—May 6, 2020 8
replacement deck would exceed the area of the deck currently in place. The Applicant could
replace the deck with a new deck of the same size without a variance, but they are asking for a
variance to build a larger deck than would be allowed by code. The evaluation of the proposal
should be based on the District Provisions in Section 1320 and the Requirements for a Variance
in Section 1355.04, Subd. 4.
Associate Planner Hartmann reviewed the surrounding area, the Plan Evaluation and provided
the Findings of Fact for review:
1. City Staff received a land use application for a request to build a replacement deck for a
single family dwelling at the Subject Property 1741 Venus Avenue.
2. A deck on a single-family detached dwelling is a permitted use in the R-1 district.
3. The proposed walkway is necessary as the means of egress out the front door of the
house.
4. The Subject Property is non-conforming with the R-1 districts standards for minimum lot
length and area requirements.
5. The Subject Property is also nonconforming for topography due to the sunken elevation
of the front yard.
6. The proposed deck and walkway would encroach into the front yard setback a combined
28 feet.
7. The proposed development of the subject parcel would conform to all other requirements
and standards of the R-ldistrict.
8. A variance may be granted if enforcement of a provision in the zoning ordinance would
cause the landowner practical difficulties.
9. Variances are only permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and
intent of the ordinance.
Associate Planner Hartmann stated staff recommends approval of Planning Case 20-004 for a
Variance at 1741 Venus Avenue, based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, as
amended by the conditions below:
1. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, engineering department staff shall review a revised
landscaping plan to ensure no impacts to the right-of-way.
2. A Building Permit shall be issued prior to commencement of construction.
3. The proposed building shall conform to all other standards and regulations in the City
Code.
Associate Planner Hartmann 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 floor to Commissioner comments.
Commissioner Jones indicated this was a wonderful project.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION—May 6, 2020 9
Commissioner Subramanian stated he appreciated the fact the neighbors were supportive.
Commissioner Vijums asked if access to the egress windows below the deck would be hindered.
Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla reported the far left egress window
would be upgraded to meet egress and building code requirements. He stated the other windows
would remain as is.
Commissioner Wicklund questioned what the square footage of the deck was currently and
asked what the square footage would be of the new deck.
William Tourdot, 1741 Venus Avenue, reported proposed deck was 375 square feet, noting the
deck would be 20' by 12' and would have a 17' by 5' bridge. He commented further on the
egress windows in the basement and reported he was not required to replace the egress windows
in the laundry room.
Commissioner Wicklund asked why the deck was being proposed to come straight out from the
house versus having the main entrance off the driveway.
Mr. Tourdot reported this matches the existing deck and the neighbors know the house by this
feature. In addition, this would provide access into the main entrance of the house.
Commissioner Wicklund questioned if the City has approved any other variances for residents
that want to put decks in the front yard.
Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla reported there were not a whole lot
of decks in front yards. He stated residents could place structures in the front yard so long as it
does not exceed 30" in height and meets appropriate setbacks. He indicated once structures were
above 30" railings were required, along with a permit. He explained this was a unique request
given the topography of the lot and there was an existing deck.
Chair Gehrig asked if this property had a backyard that supports a patio or deck.
Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla stated the back of the home has a
walkout entry with a patio.
Chair Gehrig commented he was understanding of the existing sunk in front yard and structure
in place with the bridge that extends to the front door. He understood that the existing structure
was 50 years old and was in need of replacement. He stated he was struggling with the fact the
replacement deck would exceed the requirements by double for the porch section. He questioned
what about the parcel was unique that a deck should be built on the front of the house when there
was space in the back of the home.
Mr. Tourdot indicated there were many homes in his neighborhood that had front porches and
patios.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION—May 6, 2020 10
Jennifer Granick, 1741 Venus Avenue, reported in her neighborhood there were a lot of front
patios but because of the elevation of her home she could not have a patio. She discussed the
topography of property and noted some of the new deck space would be used as a walkway into
the home, which would be unusable space. She explained the deck would be used to visit with
neighbors while kids were playing, which was consistent with the feel of the neighborhood.
Chair Gehrig asked if the topography of this property was more traditional with a deck in the
front, how far the deck could extend into the front yard setback.
Community Development Manager/City Planner Mrosla stated per City Ordinance, decks
and covered porches may extend six feet into the front and rear setback.
Commissioner Lambeth requested further information on how the deck was supported and
questioned what portions of the deck were failing.
Mr. Tourdot reported the main portion of the deck that was failing was the bridge. He stated the
bridge was canted to one side and the 2'x4's on the walkway were becoming soft. He explained
the existing deck structure could not be rebuilt as it was because it was cantilevered out from the
house. He commented further about how the deck was supported by joists that were cantilevered
out from the house, four feet on center. He discussed how construction of decks had changed in
the past 50 years.
Commissioner Lambeth reported 2'x4's was not the typical material used for decks. He asked
what the applicants would be using for deck material.
Mr. Tourdot indicated he would be using recycled decking material.
Commissioner Lambeth questioned what would happen to the cantilevered supports.
Mr. Tourdot explained this would be addressed during the building permit phase but he
anticipated a ledger would have to be installed in order to support the deck, along with posts and
footings to support the joists.
Commissioner Lambeth inquired what the scope of work would be for this project.
Mr. Tourdot stated he was proposing to remove the existing deck and to build a new deck in the
the front of his home.
Chair Gehrig commented the variance request before the Commission was for the size of the
structure. He reported the scope of the building materials was not under consideration and would
be reviewed by staff through the building permit process.
Commissioner Lambeth indicated what he was trying to get at was that the applicant was
proposing to build a maintenance free deck that would last for some time into the future.
Commissioner Vijums explained he was constructing a deck at his cabin. He commented
further on the building requirements and anticipated the proposed deck would last 50+years.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION—May 6, 2020 11
Commissioner Jones discussed the cantilevered decks he had built and stated he supported the
project as proposed.
Chair Gehrig agreed this was a fantastic project but stated he was struggling with the three
factor test. He understood this was a unique parcel but stated City Code did not allow people to
put large decks on the front of their home. For this reason, he would rather see a porch structure
built within the six foot requirement.
Commissioner Jones moved and Commissioner Viiums seconded a motion to recommend
approval of Planning Case 20-004 for a Variance at 1741 Venus Avenue based on the
findings of fact and the submitted plans, as amended by the three (3) conditions in the May
6, 2020, report to the Planning Commission. A roll call vote was taken. The motion carried
4-2 (Commissioner Jeffreys and Chair Gehrig opposed).
Commissioner Lambeth was not available for the vote.
UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS
None.
REPORTS
A. Report from the City Council
Councilmember Scott provided the Commission with an update from the City Council. He
explained the City Council was meeting virtually due to COVID-19. He reported the Council
appointed two new members to the PTRC in April. He indicated a feasibility report was ordered
for the 2021 Pavement Management Plan and approved an agreement for the Karth Lake runoff
control project. He stated the first quarter financials were also approved. He reported
construction continues for the 34th Infantry headquarters was progressing and would have a grand
opening later this summer. He explained a national grocer was interested in moving into the
Pace building. He noted the City Council had canceled all summer park and recreation programs
due to the COVID-19 crisis.
B. Planning Commission Comments and Requests
None.
ADJOURN
Commissioner Jones moved, seconded by Commissioner Jeffreys, to adiourn the May 6,
2020, Planning Commission Meeting at 8:35 p.m. A roll call vote was taken. The motion
carried unanimously (6-0, Commissioner Lambeth was not available for the vote.)
lt
�-`iIPEN�HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: June 3, 2020 PC Agenda Item 3.A
TO: Planning Commission Chair and Commissioners
FROM: Mike Mrosla, Community Development Manager/City Planner
SUBJECT: Planning Case#20-003—Public Hearing Required
Applicant: Barry O'Meara
Property Location: 3246 New Brighton Road
Request: Preliminary Plat/Final Plat and Variance
Requested Action
Barry O'Meara of O'Meara Builders ("Applicant") has submitted a Land Use application for a
variance from the minimum lot width requirement and Preliminary Plat for 3246 New Brighton
Road ("Subject Property").
Background and Proiect Overview
L Background
The subject property at 3246 New Brighton Road is approximately 3.12 acres in size and is
comprised of the decommissioned Lake Johanna Fire Station No.I building, a detached garage,
and parking areas. The two existing structures are located along New Brighton Road and there are
multiple curb cuts currently providing access to the property. The topography of the lot is relatively
flat along New Brighton Road, but then slopes down significantly to a pond located on the easterly
half of the property. The elevation change from New Brighton Road to the pond edge is roughly
15 feet. The pond occupies approximately 1.3 acres of the site leaving 1.5 acres of developable
land.
Since 2017 the Subject Property has had three(3)previous development applications reviewed but
not approved. The first application was submitted in April, 2017; the developer was requesting to
subdivide the subject property into four(4)lots, however, the former landowner and the applicant
couldn't agree on a sale price and the applicant withdrew their application. In January, 2018, a
different applicant submitted an application requesting to subdivide the subject property into four
(4) lots. On April 23, 2018, the City Council considered the application for a Preliminary Plat,
Final Plat, Comprehensive Plan Amendment, and Variance. The City Council voted to deny this
application because the proposal was not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation of
the property as Public and Institutional.
City ofArden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for June 3, 2020
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2020\20-003 3246 New Brighton Road Ecko Estates-VAR,PP\Memos Reports
Page 1 of 12
At their May 29, 2018 meeting the City Council approved a Comprehensive Plan Amendment,
Preliminary Plat and Variance at the subject property. The Comprehensive Plan Amendment
changed the designation of the property from Public and Institutional to Very Low Density
Residential. The City Council approved a Preliminary/Final Plat request would have created three
(3)single-family residential parcels on the existing lot. The proposed proj ect never came to fruition
and the property was voluntarily foreclosed.
2. Overview of Request
The Applicant is requesting to remove the existing vacant Lake Johanna Fire Station No. 1 and
associated structures and then subdivided the subject property into four(4)lots for owner-occupied
single family dwellings. The Applicant is also requesting a variance to allow the four proposed
parcels to have a width of 81.75 feet, which is 3.25 feet less the eighty-five (85) foot minimum
requirement for the R-2 District.
i \
1 . i• � Y 1
r
.. w6 "µnE'1wx�['gTR'Will '
o0
� Sa ''1-'" ��.4.. __� I •:, gbh
JJ ISTN,i
ri ve - hV / =,o f�• ,` ~ , •'G
m i
a�
o a v ] , s
—— —— d I
P.
_
1
.� g •g6 g _._-
. -
r
V
Plan Evaluation
City ofArden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for June 3, 2020
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2020\20-003 3246 New Brighton Road Ecko Estates-VAR,PP\Memos Reports
Page 2 of 12
Chapter 11, Subdivision Regulations Review
1. Minimum Subdivision Design Standards—Section 1130
City Code Section 1130.05 Easements
City subdivision regulations require dedication of a minimum 12-foot wide utility and drainage
easement along the right-of-way and centered on common lot lines. The Preliminary Plat includes
12-foot utility and drainage easements that are centered on the common lots lines throughout the
development and 12-foot easements along the New Brighton Road right-of-way and the rear
property lines. The proposed utility and drainage easements meet the City's minimum
requirements.
Where a subdivision is traversed by a watercourse, a drainage easement is required to be dedicated
substantially conforming to the lines of the watercourse. There is an existing landlocked pond
located on the easterly half of the site and the Applicant is proposing a stormwater collection pond
at the northwest corner of the landlocked pond. The applicant has provided a drainage easement
around the perimeter of both ponds. In addition, a 16.5 foot conservation easement is located
around the existing pond. A conservation easement is a voluntary legal agreement between a
landowner and government agency. The intent of the conservation easement is to permanently
limit uses of the land in order to protect the surrounding buffer area and the overall pond water
quality. The Applicant also providing a 15 foot access easement along the north property line to
allow City staff to access the proposed and existing ponds for maintenance.
Drainage 9!:
and Utility
Easement
SVL-
Conservation
Easement
A uene,V- '
X
✓/ ,t \ $ %P •�`_� �� ev. - _ ' _-__-- "mac -`"i :,
_..,.-.....-----Ir
l
City ofArden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for June 3, 2020
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2020\20-003 3246 New Brighton Road Ecko Estates-VAR,PP\Memos Reports
Page 3 of 12
City Code Section 1130.07 Watercourse
Lots abutting upon a wetland are required to have additional width or depth to assure building sites
are not subject to flooding. All building areas should be located outside the natural feature and a
minimum of two feet above the 100-year flood elevation. The drainage plan provided by the
Applicant meets ordinance standards.
City Code Section 1]30.08 Park Dedication
The Subdivision Code requires the developer of a subdivision to dedicate a reasonable percentage
of the tract to be developed into a public space. Section 1130.08 Subd. 2 of the Subdivision
Ordinance indicates that for a subdivision resulting in new dwelling units with a density less than
2.5 units per acre, the applicant would be required to dedicate ten (10) percent of the buildable
land area in the subdivision or pay a park development fee of$6,500 per residential unit. Ten (10)
percent of the development would be approximately 0.31 acres, however,the site does not provide
for a feasible public park area. A recommended condition of approval requires the developer to
pay a park development fee of$6,500 per unit, for a total fee of$26,000. This fee would be paid
prior to release of the final plat. The City Council will be asked to make a final determination of
the park dedication requirement.
City Code Section 1160.06 Street Plan
The applicant proposes four separate driveway accesses on New Brighton Road for the four single-
family residential lots. New Brighton Road is a Ramsey County roadway and the County has
reviewed and approved the proposed plans. The Applicant is also required to dedicate 10,791
square feet of Right of Way along New Brighton Road to the County. The Applicant is aware that
any disturbance occurring in the right-of-way will require a County permit. All other required
improvements, including sewer, water, utilities, and driveway connections to New Brighton Road
will be constructed in accordance with the City's Subdivision Code. No new streets are being
constructed for the development project.
Chapter 13,Zoning Regulations Review
2. District Provisions (R-2 Single Family Residential District) —Section 1320
City Code Section 1320.06 Lot Size and Dimensions Variance Requested
The applicant is proposing to subdivide the existing 3.12 acre property into four single-family
residential lots. The minimum lot size for single-family residential dwellings is 11,000 square feet
All four lots would meet the minimum lot area requirements.
Total Lot Area Width Depth
Lot (Square Feet) (Feet) (Feet/Minimum
Depth Shown
Zoning Code
(R-2 District) 11,000 85 120
1 21,827 81.75 267
2 28,140 81.75 267
3 31,793 81.75 368
4 43,357 81.75 180
The Zoning Code requires lots in the R-2 District to have a minimum width of 85 feet and a
minimum depth of 120 feet. All four lots would meet the minimum depth requirement. The
City ofArden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for June 3, 2020
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2020\20-003 3246 New Brighton Road Ecko Estates-VAR,PP\Memos Reports
Page 4 of 12
applicant has requested a variance for each lot to have a width of 81.75 feet, or 3.25 feet less than
the minimum width requirement.
City Code Section 1320.06 Structure Setbacks
The minimum building setbacks in the R-2 District are 40 feet in the front yard, 30 feet in the rear
yard, and a 5-foot minimum in the side yard, with both sides required to add up to a minimum of
15 feet. The preliminary plat submitted by the Applicant identifies potential building pads for each
lot. Based on this submittal, all setback requirements stated in the Zoning Code would be met by
the proposed development. In addition, the Applicant incorporated feedback provided from a
resident at the June 11, 2019 neighborhood meeting. The resident asked the Applicant if it were
possible to increase the front yard setback from south to north to better match the character of the
existing neighborhood. The Applicant reviewed the proposal and implemented the
recommendation as shown on the submitted plan and below. The front yard setback to the dwelling
units ranges from 40 to 60 feet.
Front Yard Rear Yard Side Yard
Lot Feet Feet Feet
R-2 District
Minimum 40 30 5 (Minimum)/ 15 (Total)
1 60 162 15.2 (North)/6.5 (South) =21.7 Total
2 50 172 10.9 (North)/ 10.9 (South) =21.8 Total
3 40 288 10.9 (North)/ 10.9 (South) =21.8 Total
4 1 40 1 235 1 7.5 (North)/ 14.2 (South) =21.7 Total
*All setback distances are approximate. Structure setbacks would be verified at the time a
Building Permit application is submitted
Structure Coverage and Landscaped Lot Area
The maximum structure coverage permitted in the R-2 District is 25 percent. Based on the
building pads shown on the submitted plans, the structure coverage on all four lots will be less
than the 25% maximum lot coverage requirement.
The minimum landscape lot area in the R-2 district is 65% of the total lot area. The definition for
landscape lot area in the Zoning Code includes the surface area of any wetlands or ponding areas,
and the portion of the existing pond on Lots 2, 3, and 4 is counted towards the minimum landscape
lot area requirement. The Preliminary Plat includes the square footage of each lot above this
wetland area. All four (4) would still meet the minimum landscape lot area requirements.
The structure coverage and landscape lot area requirements would be verified at the time Building
Permit applications are submitted.
Building Height and Density
The maximum building height in the R-2 District is 35 feet. Building height would be verified at
the time Building Permit applications are submitted. The Very Low Density Residential Land Use
allows for densities of one and one-half(1.5)to three (3) units per acre. The gross lot area of the
subject property prior to subdivision is 3.12 acres or 135,909 square feet. The gross net density of
the proposed subdivision is 1.28 units per acre. However, after subtracting the wetland area
(51,330 square feet) and right of way dedication (10,791 square feet) the proposed subdivision
would have a net density of 2.36 units per acre.
City ofArden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for June 3, 2020
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2020\20-003 3246 New Brighton Road Ecko Estates-VAR,PP\Memos Reports
Page 5 of 12
Floor Area Ratio (FAR)
Floor area is defined in City Code Section 1305.04 to mean the sum of the area of all floors of a
building measured from the exterior faces of the exterior walls (for habitable spaces). According
to our Zoning code, this definition excluding decks, garages, covered porches, attics, crawl spaces
and basements that do not meet the minimum ceiling height per Minnesota State Building Code
requirement. The FAR is obtained by dividing the sum of a building's floor area by the amount of
lot area. The maximum permitted FAR in the R-2 District is 0.3. The FAR of the dwellings would
be verified at the time Building Permit applications are submitted.
Tree Preservation
City Code Section 1325.055 outlines the Tree Preservation Ordinance. The Applicant submitted a
Tree Preservation Plan that included a tree survey of the existing trees on site. The Tree
Preservation Plan is reviewed by the City to assess the best possible layout to preserve significant
trees and to enhance the efforts to minimize damage to significant trees.
According to the Applicant, the Subject property has a total of 1,920 caliper inches of significant
trees. The Applicant is proposing to remove 466 caliper inches of trees. The ordinance allows
removal if 192 caliper inches without replacement. Removal of the remaining 274 caliper inches
of trees requires mitigation at a ratio of 1:2 replacement, or 137 caliper inches of new trees. The
Applicant is proposing to plant 10 deciduous trees at 2.5 caliper inches and 10 coniferous trees at
25 caliper inches or 50 caliper inches total. The remaining 87 caliper inches will need to be
provided by the Applicant to meet the requirements of the code.
Caliper Inches Number of Trees
Total Existing Significant Trees 1,920 150
10%Permitted Removal 192 26
Proposed Removal 466 14
Significant Trees Preserved 1,665 124
Replacement Trees Required* 137 --
Replacement Trees Proposed 50 20
Additional Replacement Trees
Required 1 87 1 TBD
*Replacement trees are calculated by subtracting the ten percent permitted
removal from the proposed removal and dividing by two.
As a condition of approval, the Applicant shall work with the City to locate the additional 87
caliper inches of replacement trees on the site or on the adjacent properties to the north and south
of subject property. If the replacement tree plantings cannot be reasonably accommodated on the
site, the City can work with the applicant to find off-site locations for the plantings or require that
a fee in lieu of the plantings be provided. The image below shows where the proposed trees are
located. The determination for the placement of the additional caliper inches will be made prior to
final plat approval.
City ofArden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for June 3, 2020
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2020\20-003 3246 New Brighton Road Ecko Estates-VAR,PP\Memos Reports
Page 6 of 12
IV
�0
f
If
V
----------
�
RUG ---------
Low
LQ- 7 U-
j(M!
VV SQO'4-FON ROAD
3. Variance Review
The Planning Commission is being asked to determine if a variance request to reduce the minimum
lot width requirement should be approved. The sketches that have been submitted show the
proposed subdivision of the parcel into four separate lots. The evaluation of the proposal should
be based on the District Provisions in Section 1320 and the Requirements for a Variance in Section
1355.04, Subd. 4.
The role of the Planning Commission is to determine and consider how the facts presented to them
compare with the city's articulated standards. The Commission should base their decision on the
facts presented and then apply those facts to the legal standards contained in city ordinances and
relevant state law.
Neighborhood opinion alone is not a valid basis for granting or denying a variance request. While
the Planning Commission may feel their decision should reflect the overall will of the residents,
City ofArden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for June 3, 2020
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2020\20-003 3246 New Brighton Road Ecko Estates-VAR-PP\Memos Reports
Page 7 of 12
the task in considering a variance request is limited to evaluating how the variance application
meets the statutory practical difficulties factors. Residents can often provide important facts that
may help in addressing these factors, however, unsubstantiated opinions and reactions to a request
do not form a legitimate basis for a variance decision.
The Planning Commission may impose conditions when granting variances as long as the
conditions are directly related and bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the
variance.For instance,if a variance is granted to the lot width requirement, any conditions attached
should presumably relate to mitigating the effect of the variance.
4. Variance Requirements—Section 1355.04, SubtL 4
The Applicant requests a variance to the minimum lot width. 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. If the applicant does not meet all
the factors of the statutory test,then a variance should not be granted. Variances are only permitted
when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance.
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 for 3246 New Brighton Road 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
permitted by the Zoning Ordinance.
Using the four lots for single family homes is a reasonable use of the Subject Property in
the R-2 Zoning District.
b. Unique Circumstances. The plight of the property owner is due to circumstances unique to
the property not created by the landowner.
The Applicant cites existing fire station served the city very well and now is not in use and
is a challenge to incorporate into the desired residential setting. Removal of the
unattractive and un-kept buildings is a necessary. In addition, a unique circumstance is
existing pond as it restricts the buildable area.
c. Character of Neighborhood. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character
of the neighborhood.
City ofArden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for June 3, 2020
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2020\20-003 3246 New Brighton Road Ecko Estates-VAR,PP\Memos Reports
Page 8 of 12
According to the Applicant, the existing neighborhood has homes and lots various sizes.
The adjacent homes and surrounding area will be improves with the new single family
homes that blend into the neighborhood.
3. Economic Consideration. Economic consideration alone does not constitute a practical
difficulty.
According to the Applicant 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.
A solar energy system is not proposed.
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. City Staff received a land use application for a request for preliminary plat and variance at
the Subject Property 3246 New Brighton Road.
2. The property at 3246 New Brighton Road is located in the R-2 — Single and Two-Family
Residential Zoning District and is guided as very low density on the Land Use plan.
3. The subject property is currently comprised of the former Lake Johanna Fire Station 1
building, a detached garage, and parking areas.
4. The subject property is 3.12 Acres.
5. The applicant has requested a Preliminary Plat in order to subdivide the property into four
(4) single-family residential lots.
6. The adjacent properties to the north, east, west and south are zoned R-2 District and are
guided for Low Density Residential uses in the Arden Hills 2040 Comprehensive Plan
7. A single-family detached dwelling is a permitted use for the lots in the R-2 district where
the Subject Property is located.
8. The applicant has requested a variance from Section 1130.07, Subd. 2 of the City Code, to
allow a lot width of 81.75 feet, or 3.25 feet less than the minimum 85-foot requirement for
the R-2 District.
9. Approximately one-third of the properties within this block that have lot widths less than
the required 85 feet for the R-2 District. While, the majority of the lots on this block are 85
feet wide or greater, few have the depth or area of the four lots proposed in the
redevelopment.
10. The proposed preliminary plat meets the other Minimum Subdivision Design requirements
included in Section 1130 of the City Code.
11. The proposed preliminary plat meets or will be required to meet the Required
Improvements for subdivisions included in Section 1140 of the City Code.
12. The proposed development requires public use dedication, as required in Section 1130.08
of the City Code.
City ofArden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for June 3, 2020
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2020\20-003 3246 New Brighton Road Ecko Estates-VAR,PP\Memos Reports
Page 9 of 12
Additional Review
Ramsey County
Ramsey County Senior Transportation Planner has reviewed and approved the proposed driveway
accesses onto New Brighton Road.
Engineering Staff
Engineering Staff reviewed the proposal and the Applicant has worked with staff to address questions
regarding their application and to provide information to staff with review.
Rice Creek Watershed
The Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) is charged with reviewing and approving the
stormwater management and drainage plan for the project. RCWD is current reviewing the
application.
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
20-003 for a Preliminary Plat and a Variance at 3246 New Brighton Road, based on the
findings of fact and the submitted plans, as amended by the conditions below:
1. The project shall be completed in accordance with the submitted plans 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 submit a park dedication fee in the amount of$26,000, subject to
the approval of the City Council. The park dedication fee shall be submitted prior to
the execution of the Final Plat.
3. Preliminary Plat approval shall expire six months from the date of the City Council
approval unless the Final Plat has been approved by the City Council and recorded
with Ramsey County or a time extension granted by the City Council.
4. A Letter of Credit in the amount of 125 percent of the cost of materials and installation
for the required replacement tree plantings shall be provided prior to the issuance of
any development permits. The Letter of Cred shall be valid for two full years from the
date of installation of the replacements trees.
5. Prior to the issuance of a Grading and Erosion Control permit the Applicant shall work
with the City to locate the additional 87 caliper inches of replacement trees on the site
or on the adjacent properties to the north and south of subject property. If the
replacement tree plantings cannot be reasonably accommodated on the site, the City
can work with the applicant to find off-site locations for the plantings or require that a
fee in lieu of the plantings be provided.
6. The applicant shall provide the City with a copy of the approved Rice Creek Watershed
District Permit prior to the issuance of any development permits.
City ofArden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for June 3, 2020
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2020\20-003 3246 New Brighton Road Ecko Estates-VAR,PP\Memos Reports
Page 10 of 12
7. Signage depicting the conservation easement boundaries shall be shown on grading
plan, final location and sign design is subject to the approval of the Public Works
Director.
8. A grading as-built and utility as-built plan shall be provided to the City upon
completion of grading and utility work.
9. The proposed buildings shall conform to all other standards and regulations in the City
Code.
10. The Applicant shall be financially responsible for all applicable water and sanitary
charges. Rates applied shall be those in effect at the time of Final Plat approval and
shall be memorialized in the Development Agreement.
11. Before construction, grading, or land clearing begins, trees or tree areas that are to be
preserved shall be visibly marked and city-approved tree protection fencing or other
method shall be installed and maintained at the critical root zones of the trees to be
protected. The location of the fencing shall be in conformance with the approved tree
preservation plan and approved by staff in writing.
12. A Grading and Erosion permit shall be obtained from the city's Engineering Division
prior to commencing any grading, land disturbance or utility activities. The
Developer shall be responsible for obtaining any permits necessary from other
agencies, including but not limited to, MPCA, Rice Creek Watershed District, and
Ramsey County, MNDOT prior to the start of any site activities.
13. The Applicant shall be responsible for protecting the proposed on-site storm sewer
infrastructure and components and any existing storm sewer from exposure to any and
all stormwater runoff, sediments and debris during all construction activities.
Temporary stormwater facilities shall be installed to protect the quality aspect of the
proposed and existing stormwater facilities prior to and during construction activities.
Maintenance of any and all temporary stormwater facilities shall be the responsibility
of the Applicant.
14. Prior to the issuance Grading and Erosion permit, the Engineering Department shall
review and approve final grading and utility plans in writing.
15. Staff shall review and approve the final landscaping plan showing a minimum of three
trees in the front yard per lot prior to the release of the Final Plat.
16. The Applicant shall be financially responsible for any cost incurred for undergrounding
existing overhead electric utilities and other associated private utilities and within the
development.
17. The Developer shall be wholly responsible for the removal of debris and fencing
found onsite.
18. Prior to the release of the Final Plat, the Applicant shall execute the grant of permanent
conservation easement and restrictive covenant for wetland and wetland buffer. A
Development Agreement shall be prepared by the City Attorney and subject to City
Council approval. The Development Agreement shall be fully executed prior to release
of the Final Plat.
• Recommend Approval as Submitted: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 20-
003 for a Preliminary Plat and Variance at 3246 New Brighton Road, based on the findings
of fact and the submitted materials.
• Recommend Denial: Motion to recommend denial Planning Case 20-003 for a Preliminary
Plat and Variance at 3246 New Brighton Road, based on the following findings:findings
City ofArden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for June 3, 2020
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2020\20-003 3246 New Brighton Road Ecko Estates-VAR,PP\Memos Reports
Page 11 of 12
to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial and why those reasons cannot
be mitigated.
• Table: Motion to table Planning Case 20-003 for a Preliminary Plat and Variance at 3246
New Brighton Road: a specific reason and information request should be included with a
motion to table.
Notice and Public Comments
A preliminary plat requires a public hearing. A public hearing notice was published in the Pioneer
Press on May 23,2020. Notice and website update was prepared by the City and mailed to property
owners within 1,000 feet of the subject property. Staff has received one email inquiring about
this project and development process. Staff has responded to the residents email (Attachment E)
to the Staff has received one (1)phone call from a resident on New Brighton Road inquiring about
the projects timing and landscaping.
Deadline for Amu Actions
The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on May 22, 2020.
Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, the City must act on this request by July 22, 2020 (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. Variance Request Letter
D. Plan Sets (I lxl7s)
E. Public Comments
City ofArden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for June 3, 2020
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2020\20-003 3246 New Brighton Road Ecko Estates-VAR,PP\Memos Reports
Page 12 of 12
Attachment A
Office Use Otily
'It For
EN HILLS Planning Case No. 20-
Submittal Date
1245 West Highway 96 Application Completed Date
Arden Hills, Minnesota 55112 Accepted by
Telephone (651) 792-7800 Receipt Number
Fax (651) 634-5137 Council Decision
www.cityofardenhills.org Council Decision Date
2020 LAND USE APPLICATION
Applicant Information
Applicant:
c
Address: F-A/0 E rJ 1' u-e(I I U+E ItL—r' L/
Telephone No.: 612 Other: 6 5-1 — 2 3 4
Fax No.:
Email Address: I C-A R a At rr�2
Property Information
Propel Owner: � .. � off? U C ----
Owner Address_ _ f_dIM_
Owner Telephone No. 6 /2 - ,?66 Other: G S/ - 'D-3 6 ;/7-O 1
Address of Pr❑perky Involved: 1 "i S air
Legal Description: ,Q,erP
Propeq ID No.:
Type of Use:
Zone: R -Z Property Acreage: 0 A 12- GtAsA-64,
Type of Repuest
❑ Comprehensive Plan Amendment(Fee: $500+ ❑ Rezoning or Escrow:
: $1g,50#ing Plan Amendment
Escrow: $2,500) (Fee: $500+Escrow: $1,500)
❑ Zoning Code or TCAAP Redevelopment Code
❑ Conditional Use or Interim Use Permit/CUP or IUP Amendment(Fee: $400+ Escrow: $1,500)
,,/Amendment(Fee: $400+ Escrow: $1,500) ❑ City Code Amendment(Fee: $350 + Escrow:
M Preliminary Plat(Fee: $500+ Escrow: $2,500) $1,500)
❑ Final Plat(Fee: $500+ Escrow: $1,500) ❑ Lot Split/Minor Subdivision (R-1 and R-2 Districts
�r nly) (Fee: $350+ Escrow: $1,000)
❑ Concept Plan Review(Fee: $150+Escrow: Variance or Permitted Adjustment(Fee: $350+
$1,000) Escrow: $1,000)
Development Plan (Fee: $500 + Escrow: $2,500)
❑ Master Planned Unit Development r Master Special ❑ Vacation of Easement or Right-of-Way(Fee: $150+
Escrow: $1,000)
Development Plan (Fee: $350+ Escrow: $1,500)
❑ Final Planned Unit Development or Final Special ❑ Appeal of Administrative Decision (Fee: $150+
Escrow: $1,000)
❑ Planned Unit Ilan Amendment
Amendment or Special ❑ Land Use Requests-Not Already Specified (Fee:
$Develo1,500 ment Play Amendment(Fee: $400+Escrow: $150+ Escrow: $1,000
$1,500�
❑ Site Plan Review(Fee: $400+Escrow: $1,500)
Pagel of 3
Brief Description of Request(please also include a taped, detailed letter explaining the project):
E47 C T q L � 7 0C416_- 000[A -
*IMPORTANT*
• Certain applications are subject to review and approval by the Rice Creek Watershed
District. Contact RCWD directly at 763-398-3070 for additional information.
• The land use application fees do not cover building, sign, or other permit fees that
may be required upon approval of a land use application.
• All applications will be subject to additional fees for reimbursement of consultant costs
associated with filing, reviewing, and processing of application in the form of an
escrow to the City.
Filing & Information Requirements
The City requests that you make a pre-application meeting with the City Planner to discuss the application
process, requirements, and deadlines. Unless waived by the City Planner or Planning Commission, a certified
survey of the property is required for all applications. A checklist with additional application requirements can be
found at www.citvofardenhills.org/landuseapi2lications.
Completellncomplete Applications
Under Minnesota Statute, Chapter 15.99, cities have 15 business days to review all plans and application
materials to ensure they satisfy City requirements. During the 15 day review period, planning staff will provide
written comments on the application and may request plan revisions. If the application is determined to be
complete, Minnesota State Statute then requires the City to approve or deny the application within 60 days, up
to 120 days. If not complete, the City may require plan revisions and/or additional information before the
application is scheduled for Planning Commission review and/or City Council action. Project will not be
scheduled for any meeting until the application submittal is found to be complete by the City Planner.
Payment of Fees and Escrows
The undersigned acknowledges that she/he understands that before a land use application can be deemed
complete, all required fees and escrows must be paid to the City. The applicant is responsible for all costs
incurred by the City related to the processing of this application. Each separate land use request shall be
charged a separate administrative fee and escrow even if submitted on the same application. Costs expended in
reviewing and processing an application will be charged against the cash escrow and credited to the City.
Charges to the escrow may include planning and engineering staff time, City Attorney and consulting fees, and
mailing costs. If, at any time, a required cash escrow is depleted to less than 20 percent of its original amount,
the applicant shall deposit additional funds in the cash escrow account as determined by the City. The City may
withhold final action on a land use application, withhold building permits, and/or rescind prior action until all fees
have been paid. Unused portions of an escrow are returned to the applicant upon successful implementation of
an approved plan. The escrow may be reduced or increased by the City Planner on a project by project basis.
Notice of Meeting Attendance
In order for the Planning Commission and the City Council to consider any application, the applicant or a
designated representative must be present at the scheduled meeting. If not, the matter may be tabled until the
next available agenda.
Page 2 of 3
Meeting Schedule
Planning Commission meetings are typically held on the first Wednesday after the first Monday of each month at
6:30 PM, though please contact City Hall to verify the meeting date and time. City Council meetings are held
typically the last Monday of the same month at 7:00 PM. Meetings are held in the Council Chambers at the City
of Arden Hills, 1245 West Highway 96, Arden Hills, Minnesota 55112, unless otherwise stated. The schedules
below are for reference purposes only. Project will not be scheduled for any meeting until the application
submittal is found to be complete by the City Planner.
2019 Planning Commission and City Council Schedule (*subject to change)
TENTATIVE TENTATIVE
PLANNING CITY COUNCIL
COMMISSION MEETING
MEETING DATE* DATE*
(Generally held on the (Generally held on the
first Wednesday after the first fourth Monday at 7:00 p.m.)
Monday at 6:30 .m.
January 8 January 27
February 5 February 24
March 4 March 23
April 8 Anril27
May 6 May 25
June 3 June 22
July 8 July 27
August 5 August 24
September 9 September 28
October 7 October 26
November 11 November 23
December 9 January 11 (2021)
January 6 2021 January 25 (2021)
Acknowledgement and Signature
I hereby apply for the above consideration and declare that the information and materials submitted with this
application are complete and accurate per city code and ordinance requirements. I fully understand that I am
responsible for all costs incurred by the City related to the processing of this application.
6 l pe�
Property Owner Signature (Required) Date
Applicant Signature(If different than the property owner) Date
Please contact the City Planner at 651-792-7800
if you have any questions regarding this application.
Additional copies of this application form are available on the City's website: www.cityofardenhills.oWanduseapplicatians
Page 3 of 3
Location Map Attachment B
Beckman Avenue
PA K
- �
t:
r
�0
r
Ago
-77
• s s
Jerrold Avenue CD�z � �
r � �y
". EdgewaterA�enue
b .
a „ ro, Glen Paul FA.venue
IV
1 .
Subject Parcel `
Disclaimer:This map 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 information herein pursuant to MN
Statute 466.03 Subd 21.
Attachment C
� �
aa_ .� a4-
a-yy,
oM on ozoz sa na ai�a 0N3�31as3ioui33�s 3�iu ao � Ws = q
bo YlOS9XXIlY'8111NXASILVIS]NO]�8tl F (� rM
wgp-d d�se'sitiad�s o Z
—
uoudiaos3a�uoism3�, qs�u
z
5
a zz
0 O a a
r 9 z z
C - _ - - z 00
N U F F
E z W W
C1 g z N
O a a
J J
l l q ®o4oa} O 11 I `8 O Q 0 ¢¢a
C I I I r � I • I �� � �� Z w�w0 aaa
a
N.zi F NSW
W LL�w w o
Gui
j H H 00
z
W_ r2UU' Ommoog
° e -� w
w y w w i5 w w w b w w w w n w w
ea
G
tp
= Coloo� �u sg k
y n p _ Fv__
ME
iD Ms¢.wx ID
8 Gww zw Ck G _ C - mGu'n
' ❑ .`°€��8e„° _o .:w �o �°z zm�° w-��..dd_pzh F H�_° w.d d rin�¢m�z
A 3
$ W
— _—--
-A,co 41
W \
6
zyo
F
elm
F P
as
y
W
fA CO ud
LU
W C4
C003
W
W a %✓ + -
�oN�on ozoza�ea a1�a N<ne s,vnow3a ao � Ws
bo mosIxxiW'smx xaoan '., CN
s w'eiiu �oisiNa SIMS]omal d°m o Z
"'��-_ _ 2 �� c�
uoueiao auoisina X. m �i o �W .��a
Z CO)
QW
JH
a�
fA y
JW
OY
20
W
w - lz
d a -
a � o
a o o o U O o
— tt tt ¢ rQn tt
1
1
� IM, � I
OL
oa ass p
a�
L � �
e J
mo,
m
m
ae �
i G F ems.
2g
T
0
o
—sand snowwniie ---------
1
aa„ P
r
bars
a
as
OVOi NO1HOIig MIN
30 3NII d31N30 x_o \
o m
zs
Msa a
e,s
a Pa
01 S3,ONV 1HJIH
n
M
1V ONINNna 3Nn Leo°��,� — C �•
a o
a�o s w aa
cu
Y
oNon ozozs�sa aL�a z Ws
Ntna.unun saLls,lnn a 4 � r,
bo moSINNIM'Smxxaoan w �=z -
s 0 p°aa S31Y1S�OA�� d m z '�_< �I CJ
waoa as dese'¢itiad�¢ o o K W Z
uoudlaos3a�uoism3a q¢,u
Z CO)
ti a G - �koz a ti W
a
-- J
o, NG
-
= I
Po#... -1V021 N01HOla9 MIN 3O 3Nna31N33 3HL w
IO Al ILSV3HiaON i33I cI-a _
ANV o11311V2111 INII _ b 14
o
�No —
�m
/.
p
J o
w
.1N3W 35&�ALI311f1ONV �
\� � � � 39V NIV21a O3SOd0ad _
a
°C I
e
---0.0oz
1—s
z
Vie-_ — o �=me=
z ,--
s,
3M3s tl:.a ,3
i
/ -------------------------
s
v gl IL a �a — --
ie Foie �
N e P41
e a �=me
0 z \
a
p-L m
i
I i
o
m
„M
I ocwi
� o
�z-
v
I ozwl � I Z�
w
`A lo LNl"SV3 ALI3 �\
1 3JVNIVaO 035 d0ad 6�'-
— \
Poa,�
OVOa NOLHO119 IN
w 30 3NI3 2131N3S w _
xo a
z� OL S33O NV 1HJIH
iH 9NINNna INn 30
_ v
o a
i
ao N`y •� L�
NtlY
3 l6
Y
— 'OLIl OZOZlO 1 :,Is
waoaaad NOISOt13 0NH 3�HNIHi1a'�NlaHil� Q W Z F
COE
tu
bo mosIxxiW'smx xaoan
= ese's�tiad�s o
Noudla�s3a No�sm3ln aslu a v. �i o .��a
zN
QW
JH
a�
J N
mW
e ago 12 P. o 4 0 V
r a W
NLLI
b a
MM
C b
a
z
2 sNfSkIM,
�P dl z
P o � o
moo s
m
1N3w 3`4a NV
\ d0 a3sd _
/ V 1
O
I
a�
0 I'
rem
Noa
0 a
b
�t z o s
I� � a �'-sz 3M3s i�3
v
P
\ 3w #F a ----- op' rs a 0 0�oOC OCO a0C re h'� ��I
N1.11-18
rcw a'
zzo
_ mz
LB _
e
e.
Ns
s
X—
t
T h r<c
ee
e \
"ia Z w r
e` 9 ' cull
see.
�I _________ �I eL - sssa�
w
ee
�e
S oa
s
e ry�
n \\
m f S Le
--OVON NOIN3IN9 MIN _ —
`e s 30 3NI]N HO - m
`fse a v' F m rn
a i I
S330NV a IV _N
Wa .. iH aNINNna 3Nn
r,t e:a N;� •• ma
lu
Y
ory on oioz sn eo :11,
°—
mos�xxiW'smx xaoan w _ A
s P�°aa�ie� S11YIS]omal �_<- _
= waoaaadese's�tiad�s o -
uoudiw�s3a�uoism3�ti
NN
JW
as
w�
w
s - tt
<6ie
v jAso "e
,w,�ry rvwe„o
rg W -
i�
—
a
_ 5� F�a ado P N 8w i
H� H�;
roN�n ozoz�a sa aiHa z ���{
uio
tl10S1XXIlY'8111N X30tltl o w %7/7/7
s . Om c_ Lo
S11Y1S]OAal
s�w3��wo� waoaeaad�se's�e°des o oca
uoudiaos3a�uoism3�, q!
mm
JW
as
w�
Gm
w
Q U
F— rz W
Uj
m
a°
a °z
m
o Jo
w o
m
o -
W ' r
LL
� J
woa
os
¢ -------
Cal
=r
z - = -
o - Go III Fo
a�
a�
"gv
z � Y IIIIIII
-
... -
�g s u 9 s
s IIIIIIff III�IIIII II�ILH
=io
HEM-
1519 Pill
60 IIII I11111I11IIII1IIII
RRiHmiffill
iHmiffill
iimiii
=_
w
— z
s_
O
a w
-
J
s
:W p
oNon ozoza�ea a3Ha rvv,d rvoi z ���{
-_ N011flllOd 2131tlM3W21018 a0
moSINNIN'Smxxaoan w _ A
ca
SILVIS]OAJl \caiI
- Weoaeaadese Isuead�s d"'O W<
N011dIa�53a NOISIn3a Nsly y G, y� U ��a
Z CO)
QW
JH
a�
Ow
W Y
�W-sm 7
dQ �
W
MW
p � a
6gQ 4 0
E 3
Wn
F
"EV 2da 3
0
71, N
-
Hn
g.
was
_ dF_ C C C 4 bC C L.77
i02K
£
6 ire .:£
E 3 "t £
a a rr_ a_dcd mcdzcd 2 _�a omo . a adc.o mrc ro`�z� emm.LLw rood rnw.,� ado �x ao- m a _.r r�aa mo cd dd,.��aLL_rc e.,um a �r
aw
- - _
- C W - .3 �6
omamm gams r�r xr� n dmaamm« N�o 'zxa m.,<_ ma aVmm gym. .x_v <a
rotv�n ozoza�ea ai�a Nv,d Noi z W eS
N011flllOd 2131tlM3W210is a 0
VIOSINNIN'Smxxaoan w
ca
SILVIS]omal d m o m = NJ¢ ca
N011d1a� a NOISIn3 Wepeey u�lsueptlsl y„ �� O
Z CO)
QW
JH
a�
W Ow
< ZY
WU
z ?W
w IL
z m
O a
U Z
� O
0
Z ~
O �
O J
J
U O
LLI
3
Cl)
Pal
LU
DSO y4
d= doh
Zwo.wn= oC
-_ ytw5 W a_ ik'u:apG
-
w
z
LU
O
LU
Lu
a
F €
y k z Is
3¢ ma „o
moSINNIN'SmNNIGOV o w _ 3 - c� raft
s .un SILVIS]omal d m o ���: Z
- uoudm�s3a�uoisi�3lb u �W �,a
Z CO)
QW
JH
o o> W~
(n
o� _w� wean>z wo o a °z s
U Q
ou zaowoi z N 0
o . wog oo �_�>Y�
0
000o go= oLL moo a6om6o z� F �3 o m m m 4> 3 z Z W
a¢�Q mum= o0o GzG < z m
° w °
?ovi �30�� g° o wzo o r
z� ;5� �`z gzu"i oY a o w
z za=u oo�° �ao Viz° zoma use ooz of m �� aQw 00 Fo oN o
w� ¢a m �'
u zmFa m°wEwz°J oz7z w ° _
V1 a 3 Y >a r z a i o f
z ~moo Noovim�zY w>ooz Fow� oo OZa U)
Fo zu m 0 -� 5� °xr� a
°aw
aoh�oz�w z�?ooww ow�s�zaroru�`"
uoz�YWNiza��WaFzgwau?rm�'��g"oQiwUO���oUoo oow�os-a�F�a�S a o�d6°oJvogzZi oF�u0Jw°sm�v��uozJa ouz zow��wm�w��~gFwomY�°mwza �a��xwmw�w�o'o w�LLwz0 o¢ uQ oao oda m
< u°aas 0 onaz<oa 5 � a� zp a 5s°-
�waawo�LL
^�¢M i�
woo
.,4 oa uwi
DOT T2
'110
�dg
- I �
I �
i
i DC
o
pF �
a
�I S {5 tl31 Z X3 O 0 \ e�
O
0
'i
Y ,
�Y.*
m
s,
e. ry
r
s L
I �9�
�I �zl szs
to
II izw
4 .
ozw
a
-----
IOVNIV —
�. oo•oos
ussssses
71
OVOB NO1HOlag MIN
s�.
00 3NI, iH xo
O s�
of s3 aNv ivala w \ 3 R
�o a
Y
dd9906L
Lomm 499)-.j
Prooze-Lgc 499)'l-I
KOSS NW'SOWI Oull
9 pn,l....... P oLL alinS'3N OAlia q)le-1 9/i
AiAmS pue-I.leuoisseloi d
.............. sio
..... .......
.. .....PPV I p 4
UNI SNUS W011H I 14�
..... . ,/,D/z, P'.P,0 4a P,,A
1111 1 11,
Z-9 NH�''�H-PIV P— 9IZ2 P-11- I-—IPPV SIH I'IS1 Sl.—
11NINV.
SUOH ....S
......1 MUM 33ui
1- -P
Pa,aP
1"I —N'I I- '1 11—1--—' ....... I- ---
..... ..8'NII ...NII
P-111�111�,P1.111111.1�111'PI-11-111"Ill-P 21�11.11 X.o�111:11,11,11�'ll"�ll,�,.,,o�,,,-a�,,���,,o,,,,,�,,,o�,, .,,p*o,,,,.
111ON"
1- ",N, Ilb, 11 '8"INII INIIS 1�
--p N:NIVIII ...NI�l
-'P P"I —N 1 1 l—-—' I"" III.N
(21 09 ON) 1111 l'
-j n,Ai noo Aasma S-M—Hd—S31ONII
3AltlA NIIIM--1
III IN NIN I S31IN
"S�' _'S _�l
P'.. HNI.
110d dIAOd SHON30
'N 31OHN-Sn--
V38J�S,�S31ONII
..........P"I ........... H ..._
�p I'll 131,112 lol�llp-'mo�',' qp'2n-"T,'-o0� jpno, N... IIIONII
NOIIVA—1011 IN III "NII
I-
P","-p 0 -N
'o N nJ—0NII
Nl—
N 0NINDIIIONDH3`8VV S'I'ON'10 U
P—O —N p—PZ —H—H NOdl'—'D A-03 AISNVd"ON"011l—SV ON—IN—NON N081 SlION10
�s p
ON3031
P a = a lz a H2 P C, .S P 1 S
HOlidiHOS30 1VO31
ez 5fv0'oc dml'CC'32S AO l vd
dVW WHIM
NN INn.,
t HILION
2116 ON A8=]'S'1'1`N`nON0l]SAH'V'�
lo
IT12�3 H�ON—IHI
INII-I
71 114
-4
Ja�
wl,
N
SL 7111-�
H—N IHI AO H,no,
33,
NI
wardIN
X,
APZP
'3NI'NoinnuISN03 VHV3W.0 8 -AOI-
S31V1S3 0)133-10-
N�
- - - - ARMS 10 3IV31111033
dd9M6
oz/so/.0 oIN wo-L96(L99)-d OOZ9-L90(L99)'la1
a t4099 NW`sa>le�oul-I MM
pn fia
�_/��/_� OLL alln anla a e
S 3N U � 19LL9
inn
a„sa,t sao a a g puel leuolssa;oad
r:vrov, o e a
v: r,os,o u�nos au�wo„ I,asa,u„o� ��o�s�000a�o�u ea MaN,o
uz0v:
NIIwP o,o�u,w.,u o aaswoa to afi oa 0 a,us,o.f o,,as,a 0a oN uoswpa P zf „o ut
�ti`a°�o oaa a3��3a <:�:y. Mia s3nn,�x3�3a�d i SICI 6£I—u�sN3n n3sndnad
Nd`> [,31 ❑m 6uiu 35 6LZ'l£=3ZIS 10,h,IWV3 310NIS 39—V
(53tlJtl SZ'0)'35 16L OL NOI1V3I010 nVM 301N0N
£r£SZ IN a >i, 1111 N0
q--�o (sa tl Z L£)'f 5 606 S£L= ,I,I'V8 d
d39
v� �l i 1 a 4 NI 5 P. i �1 Z1 i 1 1 1 i otii 1 +
NOUVROOiNI1NIMBA38
RI1'n�o 1 11,PJo 1 „ P .w , s a�a a o� v .�� o v, s v„ o v� s �„ . II 1333 z� M�a Id HIGIM IVM3n180 33�Mn„d wnwlKVw
11
,0 uolr.ten .� pa,a� 3333 oal.n3d30 30,wnwmlw
51(21V09 oN) (sn
v10S3W1w`A1NflOo A3SWvd 30Ndlavn v ONlnsand 5I\NvO11
dV)\
3)O,000 u� tl3aIWIN
NIW
a s .w a[z a o[ <
0110
w„ T , NOI1 MS3811 E n,NO SO� \ne,d\e\3,NIw\333\n9
a(o°va3��oN a3da
+ eIvdw 3N e�n vN3n=3e I,wr3 eML n 3ZN`s)ev3a
INI I'm
03,NII sr11 nNnn3 vN3w a 9NINOl JNIISIN3
8N3J31N3
10ll-IIN1111a<a. 1311aIeN33 �ra,a ou,°,aulr°s,,a
oyouo
ar ene,3 °�33adMo3 woww ,�auap aul,nap„pa,ora,a=oM a�,�==uv
snnng3dw wn,op r,un0,aa=woe u0 a,o Mo�=fiu.oae
az 3 srsz IS assr 35 Lsrs a San\na\s sz 3,edMo„ wnw w — ----- 0 o/ ua
_ —� --v sung puo pny 03 aq Pz)a awm swa 6a�ins pa.3
I III` 3s mv'u3s£atu3s eLeel3s ae'/a =ONv,33M 3noev v3av 3o,n3o3
. z L w e N era w� R 1 ppv
—
'<= 01 o,HVI ONn S3J UMOO 319VM011V W8WIKVW S�lON
OZ'9NM NOC'dM1'CC'o3S do 1 vd -- -
M ALINIBIA "° es.b -----�—J — —----
wNna �do L ea: ee , r rL
as°a���e,� Nniv <�0 a3�
£9L6 "g S1N3W3S731tlOIdA1 3�d�s Hdnx�s
ON
sw
o H1dON
7
a
/
/
1 's°°tea. 78'9B 1 m•o j ` .-_
"a
9 II
s
I I am a
i, II a 6 for i. �2
,� .... _7 .Y cN Asp• O ..
a
p� ..3r �o \IIHi
�
g \
�� i
\� / 8
ms
s
a
,
a
11111011 INII
sr
a�
ae /
t \
rzs /
rcil \
'0N1`Nouona1SN00 VHV3W.0 8 _ao;_
S31tf1S3 ON33—10—
a 3103N1a%.aaN Md AUVNIW11]8d
dd9M6
LOL9•L9£(L99)-d OOZ9-L9£(L99),lal
� s0 91 9Hr tIL099 NW`saMel null
1 oZ/so/so s 3 woapnlfiammm
OLL allnS`3N anlad OAel 9LL9
NII ' ° A- saoAananS puel leuolssa;oad
N11pOm 3l MOAT. 96S1 13ISd 0661
✓an 3.
bssZ N �� al 0 _ " --
N114N' 3wvr -s 0
J 93l N011�OJ SBBI 9-8—Sa8 3l1
1
1
�L£Hl £z00Z N0110J sZbl
9
ol 98 tlN)SS
papun oo — pa5oda maSo,pi I'll N0110J 1881 1811 3ldVW ££Hl Zl MOIIIM lZbl £b l6'ONNtlVNNJN 39 aNOOJ b3SWVd
na,ap 9 MUVEHON38
- (3ivx aN)
8 "IV, sL�� .� 9Z9� z W,3
.,111 =(a'1)01-11IW 39 01 SIHXNI 93dnd 91 Nl3 OL8l 91-a N01W,3 SbHI al s 3W13 V10S3YJNV'A1Nnoo)-SsmvJ
191,
T�3 " ,w•o, .,
.H9b=03AON3tl 30 01 S33tl11NtlJI3INJIS 1V10
Z6� =lVA0W39 33d11NtlJI3IN0Is%Ol 1Z-88 3 Wtl3 H981 Zel N01W13 11 X Zl KKKK
IKK L0
O1I +��
,ate =S3 N9J— 1 Wl3 981 6 09 91 Ol O9VdJ b0£1
„£ Z =SIHJNI tl 98 013 X09 1981 Z8 0 3W13 bl9l Zl 3ldtlW 90£1
JNI1NVId 3391 MIN 30 SIHJNI I--L£
bal=NIVNa 01 S33a1 3o d3a——01 n L
b8 013X09 I., 8 Wl3 LLOH1 X-X ZO-bZ N01100 1911
9Z-03AOW
IS,
I'l
SNOI1—DIVJ 1N3W3—d1d A IVAONtl 3- IIAll 111011,
9
A80IN3ANI3381 £Z'9N2'O£'dM1'CC'03SdO1 Vd
dVW A11NIDIA
1. �dfin„au�bu3 amA�db4 paopo,dd� 1 pl. �nld3a`P old = ti'3a;'0:a=.=3a�3W,0a�N0 N0�0a3a3 anaaA„�m
I`.a,. 11 00
�3 d;� `
aya�° o;m�pas 1 nl s, n
pl.p 9 3 11 p,Iwo l.AllL = S31ON N01103109d 33HI HdVHD
tl p 9 ,p 9 d p pan- n,3 VH - H1HON
S310N
/
aM Nx
r es
i esc \ D sand \e
Aa
s
Ib
-TV3A V 070W--T
� E
/ \
\ ---
zs
a.aON aa.,0 a.n�d IN \
i
N0I13310dd 1181 HIIM]III SLIONI0 '0NI`Nouona1SN00 VHV3W.0 8 -A01-
03A0N3d 39 01 3-S310N30
S31tf1S3 0NO3
-lo-
0 dd
Sl13110NIO3dn009"0N3311 NVld N011VA83938d I A801NIAN1 HUI
Attachment E
From: Joseph Hartmann
To: - Mike Mrosla
Subject: RE:Checking in on 3246 New Brighton Road development project
Date: Wednesday,May 20,2020 10:44:54 AM
Thank you forth e questions regarding the development project at 3246 New Brighton Road.
1. There is a proposed easement that extends 16.5 feet from the pond. In addition, staff is
proposing a more restrictive conservation easement around the pond to further protect the
water body.The plans for the Subject Property have been submitted to the Rice Creek
Watershed District and we are awaiting their review of the plans.
2. You are free to contact the developer privately and introduce your plan to them, but the
City can't compel them to use beams constituted from the cottonwoods on site, as we don't
have the regulatory authority.
3. Lake Johana Fire Department owned the subject property prior to selling the property to the
previous owner.To the best of my knowledge, the City never owned the property.The
Applicants met with City staff and the City Council prior to submitting an application for their
variance request to discuss different options for developing the site.Their company
specializes in building custom-made single family homes, and they felt that given their
history providing the community with this type of product, that could successfully build
single family homes on this site as well.They anticipated that the potential revenue they
would earn from selling the proposed lots and building four single family homes would offset
the costs of demolition they would likely incur from razing the existing buildings.
If you have any other questions, please feel free to contact us.
Joe Hartmann
Associate Planner
1245 West Highway 96 1 Arden Hills, MN 55112
651-792-7810 d i rect 1 651-792-7800 ma i n
' REh+i H1t1,
From:
Sent: Sunday, May 17, 2020 11:49 PM
To: Mike Mrosla <MMrosla@cityofardenhills.org>;Joseph Hartmann
JHartmann@cityofardenhills.org>
Subject: Re: Checking in on 3246 New Brighton Road development project
Caution: This email originated outside our organization; please use caution.
Questions on O'Meara Development Project
Hi Mike and Joe,
This is Dave Anderson of 1896 Jerrold Ave, Arden Hills, MN 55112 showing interest in the
proposed O'Meara Development Project at 3246/3242 New Brighton Road (former Lake
Johanna Fire Department buildings #1).
I finally have a few questions for you about the project. I'm not sure of the process and the
channels entirely so I hope you guys are the correct ones to direct these questions to.
1. What(again)is the distance from the pond that is protected from any development? And
has the Rice Creek Watershed weighed in on any of this development yet?
2. Could I introduce a plan to use the cottonwood lumber as substantial beams in the
construction of the houses, if it comes to cutting down the massive cottonwoods on the
property? I would imagine this would need to go into the written details of a construction
contract somehow, and I am just throwing it out there as an idea, but also to see how such a
contractual process might work with a developer such as O'Meara. I realize any lumber from
the trees would need to dry out and cure prior to using it in construction, so this might not be
such a practical idea, but again, someone mentioned it to me and so I am asking.
3. The fire station buildings have been on my mind for a long time. And now their possible
demolition has led to these questions: Who has ever actually owned these buildings? I would
imagine from the beginning the fire department owned the original station (old garage), but by
the time the second was built on this site, Arden Hills was a city I believe, and then or in
subsequent years, did the City of Arden Hills ever own these fire stations (at 3246 and 3242
New Brighton Rd)? One reason I ask is that recently I read somewhere that the City of
Shoreview owns LJFD stations #3 and#4, and so I wondered about station#1 and Arden
Hills. I believe under the Huffman Plan he was going to reuse the large fire station#1 (and not
tear down), so that implies that he purchased the whole shebang, land and buildings, when he
undertook his plan. Well, we know that story and how the bank foreclosed on the property. So
my question is, why would O'Meara buy this property knowing it would have to incur the
demolition costs and not work some deal with the Lake Johanna Fire Department(previous
owner and builder) or the City of Arden Hills (possible previous owner)?
That's all for now, and I appreciate your input on this and any answers you might have for me.
Thanks,
Dave
,-iI�EN HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: June 3, 2020 PC Agenda Item 3.B
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Mike Mrosla—Community Development Manager/City Planner
SUBECT: Planning Case #20-005 —Public Hearing Required
Applicant: Bethel University
Property Location: 2 Pine Tree North Drive
Request: Master Planned Unit Development and Preliminary/Final Plat
Requested Action
Bethel University has submitted an application for a Master Planned Unit Development, and
Preliminary/Final Plat. The Applicant is requesting to subdivide the existing parcel at 2 Pine Tree
Drive. The property is zoned B-2, General Business District and is guided as Community Mixed
Use on the Land Use Plan.
Background
In 2013 Bethel University acquired the Country Financial facility at 2 Pine Tree Drive. The
property consists of three (3)parcels that total approximately 43 acres. The northern parcel which
is 21.52 acres in size contains the access road off of Pine Tree Drive and the majority of the surface
parking. The center parcel which is 19.16 acres in size contains an existing 181,432 square foot
office building and a small fraction of the surface parking. The remaining undeveloped parcel to
the south is 2.43 acres in size and is made up of mainly woodlands and wetlands (Attachment B).
The Applicant is proposing to subdivide the northern parcel into two (2) lots and consolidate the
center parcel and the remaining southern exception parcel into one lot of record (Attachment Q.
The subject property is located within the B-2 General Business District, where higher educational
uses are permitted by Conditional Use Permit(CUP). At its November 25, 2013 meeting, the City
Council approved a CUP for Bethel University to use the existing facility as higher education. The
CUP does not include additional conditions to restrict development of the northern section of the
site.
It is important to note that the current platting process is not associated with any specific
development on the site. However, the Lake Johanna Fire Department is in talks with Bethel to
acquire the lot adjacent to Pine Tree Drive for a future fire station. This application only pertains
to Bethel's request to divide the land and not future development projects.
City ofArden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for June 3, 2020
P:\PlanningManning Cases\2020\20-005 Anderson Center Subdivision—MPUD,PP,FP
Page 1 of 6
Plan Evaluation
1. Chapter 11, Subdivisions
Preliminary and Final Plat
A plat is required to create new parcels of land or to adjust the boundary between parcels. A
Preliminary Plat is a preliminary map, drawing or chart indicating the proposed layout of the
subdivision. The purpose is to provide detailed graphic information and associated text indicating
proposed property boundaries, easements, land use, streets, utilities, drainage, and other
information required to evaluate the proposed development. A Final Plat is the final map, drawing
or chart indicating the final layout for City approval. The final plat includes the survey description
for each lot in the plat plus notes and dedication, recording and approval statements. The final plat
is the "recorded document" submitted to the county register of deeds or register of titles. The plat
must conform to all state laws.
A. Lots
The proposed plat would create three (3) lots and one (1) outlot. The table below shows the
proposed lot sizes and existing uses (Attachment Q.
Proposed Lots Total Acres Use
Lot 1 6.399 Vacant
Lot 2 3.703 Vacant
Lot 3 31.963 Developed
Outlot A 3.703 Proposed utilities and access drive
B. Street Plan and Streets
No new public or private streets are planned for the site. The existing access drive located on Pine
Tree Drive will be relocated approximately 160 feet to the north from its existing location to better
align with the existing bank access on the east side of the street. The proposed relocated driveway
is shown as Outlot A on the Preliminary/Final Plat. The drive will remain privately maintained.
C. Easements
Per the conditions of approval, the Applicant shall add three (3) public drainage and utility
easements on the final plat. The need for additional for drainage, utility, and other public
easements will be determined at the time Lot 1 and Lot 2 are developed.
D.Required Improvements
All other required improvements, including sewer, water, utilities, and driveway connections to
Pine Tree Drive will be constructed in accordance with the City's Subdivision Code. As a
condition of approval,the Applicant shall construct a sidewalk with a minimum of width of six(6)
adjacent to the access drive to provide pedestrian access to lot three (3). In addition, a sidewalk
shall be extended along Pine Tree Drive when the existing access drive is relocated or when Lot 2
develops.
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for June 3,2020
RTlanning\Planning Cases\2020\20-005 Anderson Center Subdivision—MPUD,PP,FP
Page 2 of 6
E. Park Dedication (1130.08)
Park dedication is not required as part of the current platting process as the final uses are not
identified. Park dedication requirements for the Lots 1 and 2 will be determined at the time of
future development and memorialized in a development agreement.
F. Private On-Site Trails and Buffer Area
The subject property has numerous trails throughout the property. The existing trails are private
and were not previously dedicated to the public nor were they required to be available to the public
as part of the development's approval. However, during the 2013 CUP approvals Bethel
committed to continue to share these trails with the community and that agreement will not be
modified as a part of this proposal. The existing trails located on the proposed new lots
(Attachment D)will be impacted when the parcels develop in the future and at that time staff will
work with developers to ensure appropriate pedestrian connections are implemented.
2. Chapter 13,Zoning Code Review
A. Lot Area and Dimensions
The B-2 district requires a minimum lot area of 13,000 square feet, a minimum lot width of 100
feet and a depth of 130 feet. The proposed lots exceed the minimum requirements.
B. B-2, General Business District-Planned Unit Development(PUD)Process
Proposals for new construction, redevelopment of a site, and significant modifications to existing
sites shall use the Planned Unit Development(PUD)process in the B-2, General Business District.
The PUD process is a tool that provides additional flexibility for development that an underlying
zoning district would not otherwise allow. For example, a PUD may make exceptions to setbacks,
lot coverage, parking requirements, signage, building materials, or landscaping requirements. It is
intended to overcome the limitations of zoning regulations and improve the overall design of a
project. While the PUD process allows the City to negotiate certain aspects of the development,
any conditions imposed on the PUD must have a rational basis related to the expected impact of
the development. A PUD is required for the project because it is a significant modification to the
existing site. However, no flexibility is requested at this time and the PUD document will be
amended as the parcels are developed in the future. At this time, the Applicant has submitted an
application for the first step in the PUD review process, which is the submittal and approval of a
PUD Master Plan. The PUD Master plan is an overview of overall development area. Upon
approval, the Applicant or a future developer will proceed through the PUD Final Plan for each
stage of development.
C. Uses
The current platting process is not associated with any specific development proposals. When the
City does receive a development application on either of the proposed lots it will be evaluated
based on the Arden Hills Zoning Code and will be required to go through the city's normal public
engagement process, which includes a neighborhood meeting(s), Planning Commission and City
Council. All new development in the B-2 district is also required to go through the PUD process
(City Code Section 1320.085).
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for June 3,2020
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2020\20-005 Anderson Center Subdivision—MPUD,PP,FP
Page 3 of 6
Sunested Findings of Fact
Staff offers the following findings of fact for consideration:
1. The subject property is located at 2 Pine Tree Drive and is zoned B-2, General Business
District and is guided as Community Mixed Use on the Land Use Plan.
2. The applicant has submitted an application for Master Planned Unit Development and
Preliminary/Final Plat.
3. The Applicant is requesting to create two (2) new lots of record and consolidate two (2)
existing lots into one (1) The proposed plat also creates an outlot covering the private access
road and utilities.
4. The current platting process is not associated with any specific development on the site.
5. The proposed subdivision is requesting no flexibility through the PUD process.
6. The proposed plats and Master PUD conforms with the requirements of the City Code.
7. The proposed Preliminary Plat and Final Plat are consistent with the Arden Hills Zoning Map
and the 2040 Comprehensive Plan.
Additional Review
Engineering Staff
Engineering Staff reviewed has reviewed the plans and has provided The Applicant with a
comment letter (Attachment G) and all comments shall be adopted herein by reference as a
condition of approval.
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.
1. Recommend Approval with Conditions: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 20-
005 for a Master Planned Unit Development and Preliminary Plat/Final Plat at 2 Pine Tree
Drive, based on the findings of fact and submitted plans, subject to the following conditions:
1. The project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted and 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 City
Council.
2. All conditions of the Master PUD and Preliminary Plat approval shall remain in full
force and effect.
3. The applicant shall record the Final Plat with Ramsey County and a copy shall be
provided to the City within sixty (90) days of the City's approval.
4. A Development Agreement shall be prepared by the City Attorney and subject to City
Council approval. The Development Agreement shall be fully executed prior to
release of the Final Plat.
5. Survey monuments shall be placed and installed at all block corners, angle points,
points of curves in streets, and at intermediate points as shown on the Final Plat.
Pipes or streel rods shall be placed at the corners of each lot.
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for June 3,2020
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2020\20-005 Anderson Center Subdivision—MPUD,PP,FP
Page 4 of 6
6. The Developer Agreement shall identify maintenance responsibilities for Outlot A.
Unless specifically modified within the Development Agreement, all maintenance
responsibilities shall be completed by the property owner of Lot 3, Block 1.
7. All trails on Lot 3, Block 1 shall remain open to the public and terms of the agreement
shall be memorialized in the Developers Agreement.
8. Prior to the release of the Final plat, the property owner of Lot 1, Block 1 shall submit
a maintenance plan for the exiting trails on the subject parcel unless a written
agreement between the City and owner establishes a different requirement.
9. A 6-ft wide sidewalk shall be constructed along the realigned section of the private
driveway extending from Pine Tree Drive to Lot 3.
10. A 6-ft wide sidewalk shall be constructed along the west side of Pine Tree Drive from
Outlot A to the north boundary of"Exception Parcel C" upon development of Lot 2 or
relocation of the private driveway.
11. A traffic impact analysis shall be prepared in accordance with City standards and
provided to City staff for review prior to development of Lot 1 and Lot 2.
12. Proposed extensions of water main and sanitary sewer constructed within Lot 1, Lot 2
and Outlot A shall be private utility services. Public utility easements will not be
required over private water and sanitary sewer utilities within the site. The development
agreement shall include private access easements over these utilities to the benefit of
the three lots.
13. The Applicant shall add a 20-ft wide public drainage and utility easement to the plat
extending along the north lot line for Lot 1, Block 1 and along the north lot line for
Outlot A.
14. The Applicant shall add a 20-ft wide public drainage and utility easement to the plat
extending along the south lot line for Lot 3, Block 1 between the east right-of-way line
at the terminus of Dunlap Street and the southwest corner of Lot 1.
15. The Applicant shall add a 10-ft wide public drainage and utility easement to the plat
extending along the north lot line for Lot 3, Block 1 between Outlot A and the west lot
line for Lot 3.
16. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, all items identified in the May 27, 2020
Engineering Division memo shall be addressed. All comments shall be adopted herein
by reference.
2. Recommend Approval without Conditions: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case
20-005 for a Master Planned Unit Development and Preliminary Plat/Final Plat at 2 Pine Tree
Drive, based on the findings of fact and submitted plans in the report to the Planning
Commission.
3. Recommend Denial: Motion to recommend denial of Planning Case 20-005 for a Master
Planned Unit Development and Preliminary Plat/Final Plat at 2 Pine Tree Drive based on the
following findings of fact: the Planning Commission should identify findings to deny should
specifically reference the reasons for denial and why those reasons cannot be mitigated.
4. Table: Motion to table Planning Case 20-005 for a Master Planned Unit Development and
Preliminary Plat/Final Plat at 2 Pine Tree Drive for the following reasons: the Planning
Commission should identify a specific reason and/or information request should be included
with a motion to table.
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for June 3,2020
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2020\20-005 Anderson Center Subdivision—MPUD,PP,FP
Page 5 of 6
Notice and Public Comments
Notice was published in the Pioneer Press on May 23, 2020 and a notice was mailed to properties
within 1000 feet of the subject property. As of May 28, 2020, staff has received three (3) written
comments in regard to this proposal (Attachment F).
Deadline for Amu Actions
The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on May 23, 2020.
Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, the City must act on this request by July 22, 2020 (60 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. Subdivision Exhibit
D. Trail Exhibit
E. Plan Sets (l lxl7s)
F. Public Comments
G. Engineering Review Memo
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for June 3,2020
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2020\20-005 Anderson Center Subdivision—MPUD,PP,FP
Page 6 of 6
Attachment A
For Office Use Only
EN HILLS Planning Case No. 20-4*5
-ARSubmittal Date
1245 West Highway 96 Application Completed Date
Arden Hills, Minnesota 55112 Accepted by
Telephone (651) 792-7800 Receipt Number
Fax (651) 634-5137 Council Decision
www.cityofardenhills.org Council Decision Date
2020 LAND USE APPLICATION
Applicant Information
Applicant: go r#C1 110VeAfl -
Address: , +Btu 6J'►KL D4.x,/S -- -
Telephone No.: 451 Other: 4 " 301— —Fax No,: &3.1 " �3�
Email Address:
Property Information
_Property Owner: 6074EL Ulf1 rEF1St
Owner Address: '976t�- of- su L.
Owner Telephone No. / �19n ® Other: � '
Address of Property Involved:
Le al Desori Lion:J6,9 1* ,C.Jrv►"-r' -
Prq a ID No.- Parcel ID: 343023130002 Parcel Point ID: 343023130003 Parcel ID: 343023120007
Type of Use: B-2 General Business District
Zone: Propert ry crea e: 1,884,438 Square feet or 43.261 acres
Type of Request
❑ Comprehensive Plan Amendment Fee: $500 + ❑ Rezoning or Regulating Plan Amendment
( (Fee: $500 + Escrow: $1f,500)
Escrow: $2,500) ❑ Zoning Code or TCAAP Redevelopment Code
❑ Conditional Use or Interim Use Permit/CUP or IUP Amendment(Fee: $400+ Escrow: $1,500)
Amendment(Fee: $400 + Escrow: $1,500) ❑ City Code Amendment(Fee: $350+ Escrow:
Preliminary Plat(Fee: $500 + Escrow: $2,500) $1,500)
❑ Final Plat(Fee: $500+ Escrow: $1,500) ❑ Lot Split/Minor Subdivision (R-1 and R-2 Districts
Only) (Fee: $350 + Escrow: $1,000)
❑ Concept Plan Review(Fee: $150+ Escrow: ❑ variance or Permitted Adjustment(Fee: $350 +
$1.000) Escrow: $1,000)
Master Planned Unit Development or Master Special ❑ vacation of Easement or Right-of-Way(Fee: $150 +
Development Plan (Fee: $500 + Escrow: $2,500) Escrow: $1,000)
❑ Final Planned Unit Development or Final Special ❑ Appeal of Administrative Decision (Fee: $150+
Development Plan (Fee: $350 + Escrow: $1,500) Escrow: $1,000)
❑ Planned Unit Development Amendment or Special ❑ Land Use Requests-Not Already Specified (Fee:
Development Plan Amendment(Fee: $400 + Escrow: $150 + Escrow: $1,000
$1,500)
❑ Site Plan Review(Fee: $400 + Escrow: $1,500)
Pagel of 3
Brief Description of Request(please also include a typed, detailed letter explaining the project
*IMPORTANT*
• Certain applications are subject to review and approval by the Rice Creek Watershed
District. Contact RCWD directly at 763-398-3070 for additional information.
• The land use application fees do not cover building, sign, or other permit fees that
may be required upon approval of a land use application.
• All applications will be subject to additional fees for reimbursement of consultant costs
associated with filing, reviewing, and processing of application in the form of an
escrow to the City.
Filing & Information Requirements
The City requests that you make a pre-application meeting with the City Planner to discuss the application
process, requirements, and deadlines. Unless waived by the City Planner or Planning Commission, a certified
survey of the property is required for all applications. A checklist with additional application requirements can be
found at ivNmir.ci-vvfardenhil?s.or /landusea olications-
Complete/Incomplete Applications
Under Minnesota Statute, Chapter 1u.99, cities have 15 business days to review all plans and application
materials to ensure they satisfy City requirements. During the 15 day review period, planning staff will provide
written comments on the application and may request plan revisions. If the application is determined to be
complete, Minnesota State Statute then requires the City to approve or deny the application within 60 days, up
to 120 days. If not complete, the City may require plan revisions and/or additional information before the
application is scheduled for Planning Commission review and/or City Council action. Project will not be
scheduled for any meeting until the application submittal is found to be complete by the City Planner.
Payment of Fees and Escrows
The undersigned acknowledges that she/he understands that before a land use application can be deemed
complete, all required fees and escrows must be paid to the City. The applicant is responsible for all costs
incurred by the City related to the processing of this application. Each separate land use request shall be
charged a separate administrative fee and escrow even if submitted on the same application. Costs expended in
reviewing and processing an application will be charged against the cash escrow and credited to the City.
Charges to the escrow may include planning and engineering staff time, City Attorney and consulting fees, and
mailing costs. If, at any time, a required cash escrow is depleted to less than 20 percent of its original amount,
the applicant shall deposit additional funds in the cash escrow account as determined by the City. The City may
withhold final action on a land use application, withhold building permits, and/or rescind prior action until all fees
have been paid. Unused portions of an escrow are returned to the applicant upon successful implementation of
an approved plan. The escrow may be reduced or increased by the City Planner on a project by project basis.
Notice of Meeting Attendance
In order for the Planning Commission and the City Council to consider any application, the applicant or a
designated representative must be present at the scheduled meeting. If not, the matter may be tabled until the
next available agenda.
Page 2 of 3
Meetina Schedule
Planning Commission meetings are typically held on the first Wednesday after the first Monday of each month at
6:30 PM, though please contact City Hall to verify the meeting date and time. City Council meetings are held
typically the last Monday of the same month at 7:00 PM. Meetings are held in the Council Chambers at the City
of Arden Hills. 1245 West Highway 96, Arden Hills, Minnesota 55112, unless otherwise stated. The schedules
below are for reference purposes only. Project will not be scheduled for any meeting until the application
submittal is found to be complete by the City Planner.
2019 Planning Commission and City Council Schedule (*subject to change)
TENTATIVE TENTATIVE
PLANNING CITY COUNCIL
COMMISSION MEETING
MEETING DATE* DATE*
(Generally held on the (Generally held on the
first Wednesday after the first fourth Monday at 7:00 p.m.)
Monda at 6:30 .m.
Januar 8 Januar 27
Februilill 15 Februa 24
March 4 March 23
April 8 April 27
may 6 May 25
June 3 June 22
July 8 July 27
August 5 August 24
September 9 September 28 11
October 7 October 26
November 11 November 23
December 9 Januar 11 2021
Januar 6 2021) January 25 2021
Acknowledgement and Signature
I hereby apply for the above consideration and declare that the information and materials submitted with this
application are complete and accurate per city code and ordinance requirements. I fully understand that I am
responsible for all costs incurred by the City relat d t the ocessing of this application.
2 /20
grope y wner Signatu e ( e fired) Da e
Applicant Signature (If different than the property owner) Date
Please contact the City Planner at 651-792-7800
if you have any questions regarding this application.
Additional copies of this application form are available on the City's website: www.ei fardenh+fl .o andusURQ601ions
Page 3 of 3
DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY SURVEYED
(Per Warranty Deed Doc. Nos. A4551451 and T2512961)
Parcel 1:
All of the Northwest one-quarter of the Northeast one quarter(NW 1/4 of NE 1/4) of Section 34,
Township 30 North, Range 23 West, except the following five described parcels:
A)The West one hundred twenty(W. 120)feet of the East three hundred forty-seven (E. 347)feet of the
North two hundred eighty-three (N. 283)feet thereof; and
B)The North three hundred forty-three (N. 343)feet thereof lying West of a line, being a continuation
of the Westerly line projected on a Southerly direction, of the West one hundred twenty(W. 120)feet
of the East three hundred forty-seven (E. 347)feet of the North two
hundred eighty-three (N. 283)feet of said NW 1/4 of NE 1/4.
C)That part of the East 100 feet of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 34,
Township 30, Range 23 West, which lies South of the extended South right-of-way line of Harriet Avenue
as said line is shown in the plat of Hunter's Park Fourth Addition.
D)That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 34,Township 30, Range 23,
bounded by the following described line:
Beginning at a point on the East line of said Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, distant
1,395.75 feet Northerly from the Southeast corner of the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter
of said Section 34,thence Westerly 70.00 feet at right angles to said East line;thence Northerly, parallel
with said West line to a line parallel with and distant 43.00 feet Southerly from the North line of said
Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter;thence Easterly along last said parallel line to the East line
of said Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter;thence Southerly along said East line to the point of
beginning.
E)The East 347 feet of the North 343 feet of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter(NW 1/4
of NE 1/4)of Section 34,Township 30, Range 23 according to the United States Government Survey
thereof, Ramsey County, Minnesota; excepting therefrom any part thereof
contained in the deeded legal description to the City of Arden Hills in Warranty Deed dated April 3,
1978, filed April 25, 1978, as Document No. 2000781 which deeded legal description is described as
follows:
That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 34,Township 30, Range 23,
bounded by the following described line:
Beginning at a point on the East line of said Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, distant
1,395.75 feet Northerly from the Southeast corner of the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter
of said Section 34; thence Westerly 70.00 feet at right angles to said East line;thence Northerly parallel
with said East line to a line parallel with and distant 43.00 feet Southerly from the North line of said
Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter;thence Easterly along last said parallel line to the East line
of said Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter;thence Southerly along said East line to the point of
beginning.
Subject to that part thereof taken for highway purposes by the State of Minnesota and filed for record.
Ramsey County, Minnesota
Abstract Property
Parcel 2:
The Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 34,Township 30, Range 23 West, except
part taken for Josephine Hills No. 3, and also except that part which lies Southerly and Easterly of a line
described as follows:
Beginning at the most Northerly corner of Lot 1, Block 12,Josephine Hills No. 3,thence North 61
degrees 12 minutes 00 seconds East, 30 feet;thence North 03 degrees,04 minutes 20 seconds West,
84.83 feet;thence North 75 degrees 49 minutes 18 seconds East 659.72 feet, more or less,to the East
line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, and there terminating.Subject to that part
thereof taken for highway purposes by the State of Minnesota and filed of record.
Torrens Property
Torrens Certificate No. 598428
Location Map Attachment :B]_L tag
- *• LD - ` 3' �.-...ram 'cw. ' ■ 1
- County Road•E-West
r en . ace
A d" " PI
f
Forest Lane
N 1
Skiles Lane W• `� HarrietAvenueA-. -
POT �.* ► ' n i
4 � YIT
.-
� _ 1
PARK o0
N �
(D
TA
S
Q �Z
N � Q
r (D
n,
.--4'•• �' -.r E JY 'I� S
Subject Parcel `
Disclaimer:This map is intended for reference purposes only and is
not a legally recorded map orsurvey.The City of Arden Hills shall
not be liable for any damages orclaims that arse due to accuracy,
availability,use or misuse ofthe information herein pursuantto MN
Statute 466.03 Subd 21.
Attachment C
utlot A -Access Road-
1,7
' Lot 2
Lot 1 w.
y
� �IFOFT
11*4t
1Y
Lot 3 s�
r r w I:
li
;,
A.
Crepeau Nature Preserve
ly M
Disclaimer:This map 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 arse due to accuracy,
availability,use or misuse ofthe information herein pursuantto MN
Statute 466.03 Subd 21.
Attachment D
Aw
gal
fl
i 14' '
7
Outlot A -Access Road
of 1 4
:,' yr: •.-*.
7: s
1.
)c
S'
It '�/
Sr.
7'
^�
Existing Trails ,� '�'� � ;� -- - �`•�
Park and Open Space
Proposed Parcels
�..v
Lot 1
Lot 2 N
Outlot A-Access Road
Crepeau Nature Preserve
Disclaimer:This map 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 arse due to accuracy,
availability,use or misuse ofthe information herein pursuantto MN
Statute 466.03 Subd 21.
Any
- a Sao
LU
oil,
_ E -
oil
pig
W
LI = E
r o
N oE�
- _ -
v
o � � v
� m
_2
_noo �p —noo E.
o — - - —- -o o — - E Ez
y 4
\OILd 3J X3 P 1o111 3-3
t
�Fv� try e
0 �o
aM� Ida I�sus
�esi 99 MBOf,It. � \ i
�9-oa
\ N
" -
-} N -
Ll
o J
i
0 \ w
rho
a
°ao 1 I
2$ ooH ie oP�i
"-'1 s i so Sun Hie - -N
W
n 3uie 3N o osi in Oo
,n 3un.>M-,n-r��a., o�t�e 1e 3un rv.n
w
to
Cj moo
-_OOZ
3„OZ,9Z°69N
j62
r
0009f 1 --0004 L >02� Ep4 1 III
_—-i_--'_anon a IIvuaea-`�-_-
____
O � 1® v,
w
==a n a\ud 3 duden--- 8 h�i oEo � V
00'09f rv3sv39/.is.6B8 pLL---l. �9Optx•�i
o 1]
W
w '
I swssys �'..� F o•
8 6
..
m10—
-�
n IN
/>°68N ry „ao po.
o� rou t--` --- ___ho i rvnu'aw 3 /
on 1 °"* uoiid3 "/i 3 0.%1 mry i d 3 J X 3 m I, aPgb 0`'4 SS•
.�e,\,M 3oN N 0 1i or
o�.
,
w �M
\eL,n 3un � /�
,oue\dnuwn�.,s ��
a�
1/1 IN l 3�n1 dou a 13 a 1/1 N
z
w
0 z
z
CL 00 IL cn Z 0—J CD zt
w
-2. LLD
z�
0
014
z z w 0 W
2.n
0 Z
wwzo
cn 0
CL
IM
1"VI E
A i 6f -9
21
...............
�El
El
�El
El
E]
..............
............
........ ..... . ..
.......... El IE'E
A aEl
'El
E
E" El �El
E
E E E ]EI IE
E]
EIP E]EI E H 1-1 1-1 El R 1-1 El El E 1:1 1-1 ff]
E] El
El� El
�El
-U-
E
1�9
HN T
64
............. ......... PE
IEI
E El �El El El 1-1
l YEI
El
El, 4,
[EEl U.,
Ei �El N
E Vo E
El,
El,
El os
El
❑ 'A�
....... ... El,
EG
...................
........... El,-
....... 4E]
...............
................
.. . ...............
El
E...................... ...... ..
...................
eEl ge
................
....... .....
. ...... .....
Ep
E
Z CL
00 ry E Q Z T e
OU) 4Z
C 0 S /mll Z Z --� y F Q
v `� O w wLLrn� s
mtia _ �OoIL
o..
w
\ ---
14
41
ATP
1 � m
rk
x 0
p �w
---------
i
� yl
_ _—_ — —
-- -------------
z
0 z
CL
00 IL
z
LL D
c m :5 do z
0 N
014
0 z
A OU) z
z z
0
co 0 CL w(9 0 w 0
w
Ed
-7— A ........
A
Oz
X
J/
NO U—H—
ga
2.�P
Wz- .92-m—E.- 0
0 K�.ZNH .2
p
-t7
U-0 E, Iz gar
E2
------------
Z56
55
nH
E- E E 1-1 El 0 El
A�
-4-
4�
--------------- -
d u� d'F �'ry E Z @p
L z OU Q
FD _ - 3 zoo N °�
ai E o= �/ 111 zZo0zwV
(9wcoo
mUa
o..
Gm o,�o -Ga
-
�
j�mi
2w
w U
G �
°
iE ffi
Go oNo w�¢Y
4 o�p p8 Yp_ mG po 'opz pp g�et
-
NG
cy
ME
~ L) __--
Z Z y J --
C � mm 0 = w c s;-
N U d d IS �m--
mUa �a
N l d is
_ #
3E z
G op
Nil G
�G e g g
l
I / � w
\I ��- w z
t� boo / a =�~ _ ` ` � g
0 0 / ��, o p�� \ o o=G
--------- ------ - o-- o c H �-
e a
-----------------------------------------
",
— / \ U a w
o 0 0�0000000 0 00 000 000®0
w sn V i
El
z
0
cn
tq
CL = ^ w(9
ll� z cn
oo
opw
LL D
cli
014
cl
(3113
w
z z
co 0 IL Na m U 9j - --- -- D cn
qp�
- - ---- 5 o 5 o- - — —mSip 4G`p�
L
w w
CL
00 CD
014
w _ >I Z z Z Z =__
�� ¢ >W J
coU a �a m U 9 j IL IL o'a
o
� II
ld 0 ........
- - --- --- __=- -=-_ _ --p --- 00=-0
_ � P
�_------__
a
___________ as
o I
g
' — —i
w m
5 iL
I �
0
---------------------- --_----------------------------------
L-----------I- ----------------- `/, / El0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-- - --�-- ------- -�-
W
---- ---- - 0 7
z
\ / Q
I �
o� II TN N III
I Z
I E'^ee 1,11
o�Aei 1
\111
s°
d �ry E J �
O014
d'
m
Ua
U
Z
o�
Z Z
¢a Z KJ
�s
O
o`p Kw a�aan o�
<uo 'oJ oGo
�U
� § z
r3G off? VIA
Q z
wz
Z
Q `a _ g y _
S z
I
o „gym
aU o o p88� g 9�
5
a a
- oz
- o
/ a z
No
z,
a
N n e
OUF _ 3 W LO n
v w? E o= �/�111 Z z - V -
m U d d _
mUa �a
oar
-
�a.mJu
It
oz
VA � d _ o00 000 000�ww ° �z � .�o��� a a4°eue�e�eueueioueueueii�ueu - i� o
_ aJ
- - - - - ¢ i. Vier: r °:
- - ^ �
°
`G
/ - e
o �E��mww
"3
G=
Z
m
m m a zo
m°
EIt
0 o§aoo�Ne N —� Vlz
JAuHz
14
�N
e
wx
,nz mo� g s�iaen nw3a m
a N
O\l\l\l I a
y m O = o cn
a a N N n e
z OU
LL 7
N o x �/�11 Z Z -- U -_--
NN a-a co, U —_9j_ dd ._
mUa �a
`9
of ono
m N
o� p
l
96
U
3 z
�N
og
- g3o 4z�o N ezzpy IIII e_� 'o r
n\WP
- x 0 _ IN IL Go mo o Q
L aaoo :a o
G. K
�
Qo
0
m
� 21
grr
III JIB
y m O
us
WHO
mUa �a
a=w
oao
a boo z w
sew
o� Z zz
HL
«� ���� 08�� � �• mz � _� ,�000 MVt �
yen
FSE
m `o m
w - - tiro°s�
� N � N to
Uo Z<
O K w
Z —
ez aS
Z�� z O —�w
U
—
� m
M a
o IIIII
�I� U z 8q,o M N� IIIII
m< a asi= MU z
z 5V
Z 6� Z
U
00o p ¢ot III Q 4= �11 ¢
8 `_$ Z oO Nyo Z 43I UI 4 ¢
17
— _ U
Q
r
a ��a
0 0 oz
pJ a p� U
—
� � o
— wR
w O� ag
M fU
N °c
Z 0= a
Q c �N 3 3
v w? E o= 111 Z z
C m� 0 =-
N wm-
-
mUa
o..
LU
— l _
G�
! po
Q G z
il(cT��1T�
v Al �YI V n
i U
Attachment F
From:
To: AH Plannina
Subject: 12 Pine Tree Drive Land Development
Date: Tuesday, May 26,2020 8:48:17 AM
Caution: This email originated outside our organization; please use caution.
Dear City of Arden Hills,
We received a letter from your department about Bethel College developing several lots at 12
Pine Tree Drive, and I am emailing to express my concern about this proposal. These lots are
home to many native wildlife plants and animals, as well as wetlands that are an essential part
of the ecosystem.
If you were to eliminate these areas to create another Bethel parking lot or a fire station, it
would be a huge disservice to the nature that lives there, as well as to the people in the City of
Arden Hills. Crepeau Nature Preserve is a gem for this city, and a destination for many people
in this community and from surrounding communities.
What the City of Arden Hills needs to do is to PROTECT this land as part of the Crepeau
Nature Preserve so that it can remain a sanctuary to all those who live within it and nearby.
Thank you for taking this under consideration as part of your development planning. And,
thank you for all the hard work you do to take care of this beautiful city.
Sincerely,
Josie Robinson
Arden Hills Resident
From:
To: AH Planning
Subject: PC#20-005 12 Pine Tree Drive/Anderson Center Property Plan&Master Plan Unit Development
Date: Saturday, May 23, 2020 4:29:41 PM
Caution: This email originated outside our organization; please use caution.
To the Arden Hills Planning Commission:
Thank you for the notification about the proposed plans/use for the development of 12 Pine
Tree Drive and the northern property of the Anderson Center. My name is Shawn Robinson.
My family and I live on Tiller Lane in Arden Hills. I am contacting you to let you know that
my family strongly opposes the development of the area detailed/outlined in the map you
provided.
While I understand that this area is part of Bethel's Anderson Center, it is essentially also
an extension of the Crepeau Nature Preserve and it's trail system. My family and I walk/bike
this area nearly everyday when the weather allows it. Particularly, we loop our walk onto the
trails north of Anderson Center. In fact,just this Spring, my youngest son learned how to ride
a bike on this paved path way. The wooded area is a wonderful buffer between the commercial
businesses that line Country Road E. Also, there is a large amount of local wildlife that resides
back there. This area is large/wooded enough that deer can frequently be spotted on the exact
spot where the proposed lots would be developed. During this pandemic, this little slice of
nature has been a haven and an escape for my family, our neighborhood, and community.
Now, I realize can only speak for myself and my family. However, on any given day I see
dozens of Bethel employees and students walking this pathway as well. I imagine that there
are many people in my neighborhood and in the Bethel System itself that feels the way my
family does. As I said, it is essentially an extension of the Crepeau Nature Preserve and should
be treated as such. Keep it as is, do not develop it. We don't need more parking lots, paved
structures, or buildings.
Finally, I'd like to say to Bethel College. We love being your neighbors and are proud to have
you as a pillar of our community. We want you to thrive, educate, and serve. That said, I
cannot understand why you'd want to destroy the wonderful landscape that surrounds
Anderson Center. The building is nestled like a jewel in the middle of a nature preserve, and
by eliminating the wooded area to the North of Anderson Center, you'd be destroying an
amazing aesthetic that sets the building apart from the rest. It is a truly unique campus. Don't
do this. Instead, I would hope Bethel would repaint the faded Anderson Center building, and
spruce up the pond in the back.
Thanks for the opportunity to let us speak.
Please contact me with any questions, comments, concerns.
You can reach me at 651-239-6737.
-Shawn Robinson (and family).
PS. To the Lake Johanna Fire Department. Thank you for your service and protection of our
community. We are eternally grateful. That said, I cannot understand why you would
essentially want to move closer to the Roseville Fire department building. I am sure you have
considerations/needs that the community is unaware of. Please reconsider building on this lot.
There is a huge concern that the noise that is generated by a Fire Department would
disturb/wreck the relative quiet and calm of the nature preserve and college campus.
From:
To: AH Planning
Subject: PC 20-005 12 Pine Tree Drive
Date: Saturday, May 23, 2020 10:38:11 AM
Caution: This email originated outside our organization; please use caution.
Mike,
Hello! I grew up in Arden Hills and I've owned my parent's house since 1999 at 1234
Tiller Lane. There is misinformation that my husband has heard from the neighbors
on the social media app called Next-door. You might want to check it out. I think he's
on the group called Ingerson Hill. What he had told me was that it was going to
impact Crepeau Nature Preserve.
Based on the drawing it is the North End of the property (parking lot) and it could
impact the walking trail.
I think it's a great use of the land. Please consider how the walking trails on the North
side could stay intact. It's a great trail and we are land locked by Snelling. So, it's truly
a GEM!
Thanks!,
Mary Bear-Dukes
Attachment G
�- IQEN HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: May 27, 2020
TO: Mike Mrosla, Community Development Manager/City Planner
FROM: Todd Blomstrom, Public Works Director/City Engineer
David Swearingen, Assistant City Engineer EIT
SUBJECT: 2 Pine Tree North Preliminary Plat
This memorandum summarizes engineering review comments for the preliminary plat of 2 Pine
Tree North as submitted by Sunde Land Surveying on May 27, 2020. This review is primarily
associated with the proposed preliminary plat. Additional review comments are provided for the
Utility Plan, Paving and Geometric Plan, and Grading Plan prepared by BKBM Engineers dated
May 15, 2020. A more thorough technical review of the site development plans will be prepared
after specific land uses are proposed for the lots within the proposed subdivision.
Preliminary Plat
1. A 20-ft wide public drainage and utility easement shall be added to the plat extending
along the north lot line for Lot 1, Block 1 and along the north lot line for Outlot A.
2. A 20-ft wide public drainage and utility easement shall be added to the plat extending
along the south lot line for Lot 3, Block 1 between the east right-of-way line at the
terminus of Dunlap Street and the southwest corner of Lot 1.
3. A 10-ft wide public drainage and utility easement shall be added to the plat extending
along the north lot line for Lot 3, Block 1 between Outlot A and the west lot line for Lot 3.
Streets and Traffic
1. The private driveway entrance to the Anderson Center is proposed to be realigned as part
of the proposed plat and site development. The realigned driveway shall remain a private
street. The south curb line at the connection of the private street at Pine Tree Drive shall
align with the south curb line of the driveway connection on the east side of Pine Tree
Drive to the extent possible.
2. The private driveway shall be constructed with B618 curb in accordance with City design
standards.
3. A traffic impact analysis shall be prepared in accordance with City standards and provided
to City staff for review upon designating specific land uses for Lot 1 and Lot 2.
City of Arden Hills
1245 West Highway 96 •Arden Hills Minnesota 55112
Phone 651.634.5120 •Fax 651.634.5137
www.ci.arden-hills.mn.us
-iIZEN HILLS
4. A 6-ft wide sidewalk shall be constructed along the west side of Pine Tree Drive from
Outlot A to the north boundary of "Exception Parcel U upon development of Lot 2 or
relocation of the private driveway.
5. A 6-ft wide sidewalk shall be constructed along the realigned section of the private
driveway extending from Pine Tree Drive to Lot 3.
6. A private access agreement and maintenance agreement shall be provided for the private
drive located within Outlot A as part of the development agreement.
7. Commercial type concrete driveway entrances must meet City engineering design
standards of 8-inch thickness.
Water, Sanitary Sewer and Drainage Utilities
1. Proposed extensions of water main and sanitary sewer constructed within Lot 1, Lot 2 and
Outlot A shall be private utility services. Public utility easements will not be required
over private water and sanitary sewer utilities within the site. The development agreement
shall include private access easements over these utilities to the benefit of the three lots.
2. The water distribution system layout serving Lots 1 and 2 shall be subject to additional
review by City staff and analysis of available fire flow capacity based on the City's water
distribution system model and field measurements.
3. A detailed work plan will be required prior to the City authorizing connection to the 16"
diameter water main within Pine Tree Drive due to the critical function of this water main.
4. The applicant shall conduct additional engineering analysis of the existing sanitary sewer
along the east side of Pine Tree Drive to verify that the invert elevation will allow for
gravity service to Lot 2.
5. Additional engineering review of proposed water main, sanitary sewer, and drainage
infrastructure will be conducted upon designation of specific land uses for Lots 1 and 2.
6. A storm water maintenance agreement will be required for proposed storm water basins
and improvements within Lots 1 and 2 as part of the development agreement.
7. Storm water drainage calculations shall be submitted to City engineering for review upon
designating proposed improvements on Lots 1 and 2.
8. Development of Lot 1 and Lot 2 shall be subject to all Water Connection Fees, Water
Availability Fees, Sewer Connection Fees, and Sewer Availability Fees as designated in
the City of Arden Hills Fee Schedule, as well as Metropolitan Council SAC charges.
Anticipated Permit Requirements
1. A Grading and Erosion Control Permit from the City of Arden Hills will be required due
to land disturbance exceeding 2,500 square feet.
2. A Sewer Permit is required before modification to the existing sanitary sewer structure.
3. A Water Permit is required before modification to the existing watermain system.
City of Arden Hills
-iIZEN HILLS
4. A Right of Way Permit must be obtained from the City of Arden Hills for work conducted
within the City ROW.
5. A Permit from RCWD must be obtained due to Rule D: 10,000 square feet or more of land
if any part of the disturbed area is within 300 feet of any lake, stream, wetland, or ditch.
City of Arden Hills