HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-03-23-PC AgendaAPPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
April 5, 2023 Planning Commission Regular Meeting
DRAFT 04 -05 -23 PC MINUTES.PDF
PLANNING CASES
Planning Case 22 -025 –1947 County Road D –Conditional Use Permit And
Zoning Code Amendment Chapter 13 To Accessory Home Occupations (Public
Hearing Required)
MEMO.PDF
ATTACHMENT A.PDF
ATTACHMENT B.PDF
ATTACHMENT C.PDF
ATTACHMENT D.PDF
ATTACHMENT E.PDF
ATTACHMENT F.PDF
Planning Case 23 -008 –1475 Dawn Circle –Variance (No Public Hearing
Required)
MEMO.PDF
ATTACHMENT A.PDF
ATTACHMENT B.PDF
ATTACHMENT C.PDF
ATTACHMENT D.PDF
Planning Case 23 -009 –1275 Red Fox Road –Site Plan Review (No Public
Hearing Required)
MEMO.PDF
ATTACHMENT A.PDF
ATTACHMENT B.PDF
ATTACHMENT C.PDF
ATTACHMENT D.PDF
ATTACHMENT E.PDF
ATTACHMENT F.PDF
UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS
COMMENTS AND REPORTS
Report From The City Council
Planning Commission Comments
ADJOURNMENT
ADJOURN
A quorum of the City Council may be
present at this meeting.
Chair:
Paul Vijums
Commissioners:
Jonathan
Wicklund
Kurt Weber
Arlene Mitchell
Joshua Collins
Shelley Blilie
Brad Bjorklund
Clayton
Zimmerman (Alt)
Steven Jones
(Alt)
Council Liaison:
Emily Rousseau
Planning Commission
May 3, 2023
6:30 p.m.
City Hall
Address:
1245 W Highway 96
Arden Hills MN 55112
Phone:
651 -792 -7800
Website :
www.cityofardenhills.org
City Vision
Arden Hills is a strong community that values its unique environmental setting,
strong residential neighborhoods, vital business community, well -maintained
infrastructure, fiscal soundness, and our long -standing tradition as a desirable
City in which to live, work, and play.
This meeting can be accessed remotely by joining via Zoom
To join the Zoom meeting, click this link (or copy and paste it into a new
browser): https://us02web.zoom.us/j/85381725923
This meeting will be streamed live on local Cable Channel 16 and available for playback on our website
Agenda
CALL TO ORDER
1.
2.
2.A.
Documents:
3.
3.A.
Documents:
3.B.
Documents:
3.C.
Documents:
4.
5.
5.A.
5.B.
6.
APPROVAL OF THE AGENDAAPPROVAL OF MINUTESApril 5, 2023 Planning Commission Regular MeetingDRAFT 04 -05 -23 PC MINUTES.PDFPLANNING CASESPlanning Case 22 -025 –1947 County Road D –Conditional Use Permit And Zoning Code Amendment Chapter 13 To Accessory Home Occupations (Public Hearing Required)MEMO.PDF
ATTACHMENT A.PDF
ATTACHMENT B.PDF
ATTACHMENT C.PDF
ATTACHMENT D.PDF
ATTACHMENT E.PDF
ATTACHMENT F.PDF
Planning Case 23 -008 –1475 Dawn Circle –Variance (No Public Hearing
Required)
MEMO.PDF
ATTACHMENT A.PDF
ATTACHMENT B.PDF
ATTACHMENT C.PDF
ATTACHMENT D.PDF
Planning Case 23 -009 –1275 Red Fox Road –Site Plan Review (No Public
Hearing Required)
MEMO.PDF
ATTACHMENT A.PDF
ATTACHMENT B.PDF
ATTACHMENT C.PDF
ATTACHMENT D.PDF
ATTACHMENT E.PDF
ATTACHMENT F.PDF
UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS
COMMENTS AND REPORTS
Report From The City Council
Planning Commission Comments
ADJOURNMENT
ADJOURN
A quorum of the City Council may be
present at this meeting.
Chair:Paul VijumsCommissioners:Jonathan WicklundKurt WeberArlene MitchellJoshua CollinsShelley BlilieBrad BjorklundClayton Zimmerman (Alt)Steven Jones (Alt)Council Liaison:Emily Rousseau Planning Commission May 3, 2023 6:30 p.m. City Hall Address:1245 W Highway 96Arden Hills MN 55112Phone:651 -792 -7800Website:www.cityofardenhills.orgCity VisionArden Hills is a strong community that values its unique environmental setting,strong residential neighborhoods, vital business community, well -maintained infrastructure, fiscal soundness, and our long -standing tradition as a desirableCity in which to live, work, and play.This meeting can be accessed remotely by joining via ZoomTo join the Zoom meeting, click this link (or copy and paste it into a new browser): https://us02web.zoom.us/j/85381725923This meeting will be streamed live on local Cable Channel 16 and available for playback on our website AgendaCALL TO ORDER1.2.2.A.Documents:3.3.A.Documents:
3.B.
Documents:
3.C.
Documents:
4.
5.
5.A.
5.B.
6.
Approved: May 3, 2023
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA
PLANNING COMMISSION
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 5, 2023
6:30 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY HALL
CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Chair Paul Vijums called to order the regular Planning
Commission meeting at 6:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Present were: Chair Paul Vijums, Commissioners Brad Bjorklund, Shelley Blilie, Joshua Collins,
Arlene Mitchell, Kurtis Weber and Jonathan Wicklund.
Absent: Commissioners Steven Jones (alternate) and Clayton Zimmerman (alternate).
Also present were: Community Development Director Jessica Jagoe and Councilmember Emily
Rousseau.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA – APRIL 5, 2023
Commissioner Mitchell moved, seconded by Commissioner Weber, to approve the April 5,
2023, agenda as presented. The motion carried unanimously (7-0).
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
March 8, 2023 – Planning Commission Regular Meeting
Commissioner Weber moved, seconded by Commissioner Bjorklund, to approve the March
8, 2023, Planning Commission Regular Meeting as presented. The motion carried
unanimously (7-0).
PLANNING CASES
A.Planning Case 23-007; 1273 West County Road E – Site Plan Review and Zoning
Code Amendment Chapter 13 to Allow Commercial Recreation – Outdoor in the B2
Zoning District – Public Hearing
Community Development Director Jagoe stated the Applicant is applying for Site Plan Review
for evaluation of the site layout and parking modifications that are being proposed to expand the
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – April 5, 2023 2
existing outdoor patio area. The patio expansion will include additional dining tables, pergolas, a
lounge area with fireplace, and a commercial recreation area for cornhole leagues. In order to
construct the patio expansion, the Applicant would need to remove five parking spaces in front of
the building. Two of those spaces are accessible parking spaces that will be relocated near the
patio within the existing parking lot. A Site Plan Review is required in any Business, Industrial,
or Multiple Family Zoning District when there is the reorganization of parking, drives, and
entrances.
Community Development Director Jagoe explained as part of the application, the Applicant is
also requesting a zoning code amendment to allow for commercial recreational use to be
conducted outdoors in the B-2 Zoning District. Currently, the city code limits any commercial
recreational activity to be conducted within an enclosed building (i.e. indoors). The Applicant is
proposing that the allowance for a commercial recreation – outdoor would be limited to being an
accessory use only when conducted in conjunction with a commercial recreation – indoor land
use. Additionally, their narrative notes that restrictions could be included in the amended
ordinance language such as capping the evening hours for which the outdoor recreational activity
would be allowed (i.e. 10 PM) or no high voltage lighting (i.e. flood lights).
Community Development Director Jagoe reported the Subject Property is approximately 1.5
acres. The bowling alley also features a full service restaurant/party room and an arcade. In
addition to the Subject Property, the Applicant owns two other parcels in the immediate area (i.e.
east and north) along Connelly Avenue that are utilized for overflow off-street parking for the
bowling alley. Neither of these parcels have a structure, parking lot only.
Community Development Director Jagoe reviewed the surrounding area, the Plan Evaluation
and provided the Findings of Fact for review:
General Findings:
1. The Applicant has submitted an application for Site Plan Review at 1273 West County
Road E to expand the existing outdoor patio that will include an accessory outdoor
commercial recreation area.
2. The Subject Property is located within the B2 General Business District and is guided as
Community Mixed Use on the 2040 Land Use Plan.
3. Through the Site Plan Review, the Applicant is seeking approval to remove five off-street
parking spaces and reconfigure the location of accessible parking spaces in order to
expand the outdoor patio space.
4. The Applicant is proposing to add approximately 1,350 square feet of new impervious
surface for the expanded outdoor patio area and is converting approximately the same
square footage of existing impervious surface to a permeable surface with the addition of
artificial turf on the Subject Property.
5. The proposed plan does not conflict with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning
Code or the Comprehensive Development Plan for the City.
6. The application is not anticipated to create a negative impact on the immediate area or the
community as a whole.
7. The proposed plan will not produce any permanent noise, odors, vibration, smoke, dust,
air pollution, heat, liquid, or solid waste, and other nuisance characteristics.
8. The proposed plan is not anticipated to have any impact on traffic or parking conditions.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – April 5, 2023 3
9. The outdoor patio and accessory commercial recreation – outdoor area would be in
compliance with all provisions of the Zoning Code.
10. A public hearing is not required for Site Plan Review.
Text Amendment Findings:
1. Flaherty’s, The Applicant, is proposing amendments to the language of Chapter 13 –
Zoning Code of the City Code.
2. Currently, Section 1305.04 does not include a definition for Commercial Recreation –
Outdoor.
3. The Applicant is proposing the City amend the zoning code to add a definition for
Commercial Recreation - Outdoor to Section 1305.04 of the Zoning Code.
4. The Applicant is proposing an amendment to alter the Land Use Chart in Section 1320.05
of the Zoning Code to allow a Commercial Recreation – Outdoor as an Accessory Use in
the B2 General Business District.
5. The proposed amendment advances the economic development goals in the City’s
Comprehensive Plan because it provides for land use regulations in commercial zones
that provide flexibility for economic development while requiring high aesthetic
standards.
6. Amendments to the Zoning Code regulations require a public hearing prior to action by
the City Council.
7. If the zoning amendments were approved, an Applicant would be required to apply for an
Administrative Permit for the accessory use to allow Commercial Recreation – Outdoor
within the B2 Zoning District.
Community Development Director Jagoe reviewed the options available for Planning Case 23-
007 to the Planning Commission on this matter:
1. Recommend Approval with Conditions
1. That the project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted as
amended by the conditions of approval. Any significant changes to these plans, as
determined by the Community Development Director, shall require review and
approval by the Planning Commission and City Council.
2. An administrative permit shall be obtained for the commercial recreation outdoor
area.
3. Prior to commencement of patio expansion, the Applicant shall provide the City with
the final erosion control plans for review and approval by the Public Works
Director/City Engineer.
4. All retaining wall materials shall be complementary to the building materials and
shall be approved in writing by the Planning Division prior to issuance of a building
permit. Retaining walls greater than four (4) feet in height shall be engineered and
detailed calculations shall be submitted to the City.
5. The Applicant shall be responsible for obtaining any permits necessary from other
agencies, including but not limited to, Rice Creek Watershed District and Ramsey
County prior to the start of any site activities. Verification whether a permit is
required or not shall be provided to the City.
2. Recommend Approval as Submitted
3. Recommend Denial
4. Table
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – April 5, 2023 4
Chair Vijums opened the floor to Commissioner comments.
Commissioner Bjorklund stated he had a lot of concerns with the proposal. He questioned if
Flaherty’s would be serving alcohol in the outdoor locations.
Community Development Director Jagoe explained the Applicant was currently allowed to
serve alcohol on the patio and this service would continue in the new expanded patio area.
Commissioner Bjorklund indicated he was concerned with noise that would be generated from
the expanded patio area. He feared amplified sound would be coming from Flaherty’s which
would adversely impact the quiet enjoyment of the surrounding residential neighbors. He
suggested the patio area be properly screened.
Commissioner Collins requested further information on what was meant by commercial
recreation.
Community Development Director Jagoe explained this included bowling alleys, indoor
archery or health clubs that were in a commercial zoning district.
Commissioner Weber stated he supported the request and recommended screening be
considered for the patio area.
Chair Vijums questioned if the proposed zoning code language would apply to future
commercial recreation requests.
Community Development Director Jagoe stated this language would apply to businesses that
were commercial recreation indoor uses that wished to expand to having commercial recreation
outdoor use.
Chair Vijums asked how staff came up with the proposed size limitations (1,500 square feet).
Community Development Director Jagoe explained this was based on the proposed request
and staff attempting to set a standard for the outdoor space so that it might not be expanded into
the size of a hockey rink or ballfield size outdoor area.
Chair Vijums supported the City having more flexibility with the size of the outdoor recreation
space or perhaps having this be a ratio to the building size.
Community Development Director Jagoe stated the Planning Commission could modify this
language or make the outdoor recreation a conditional use.
Commissioner Weber indicated he did not believe it was appropriate to change City Code that
only benefits one business in the City. He supported outdoor recreation being more open to other
businesses as well.
Commissioner Collins commented he supported the Commission discussing the size of the
outdoor space further. He explained he did not want the outdoor spaces taken to an extreme, but
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – April 5, 2023 5
rather would support the City moving forward with staff’s recommendation as a model for
success moving forward.
Chair Vijums explained he supported the model provided by staff as well.
Commissioner Wicklund requested further information regarding what the options would be to
screen the outdoor recreational space.
Community Development Director Jagoe discussed the pergola that would be installed on site
noting the pergola would have greenery planted to grow on it. She then reviewed the location of a
20 foot Ramsey County easement on the Flaherty’s property, noting the patio would go right to
the edge of the easement. She cautioned the applicant from putting any plantings in the easement
area.
Commissioner Wicklund stated he was in favor of the language provided by staff when it came
to the size of the outdoor recreation area.
Commissioner Mitchell indicated she supported the expanded outdoor patio area being a fun
place for individuals. She did not want the area to be closed off from the passing public, but
rather thought the area should be visible from the street as a welcoming space.
Chair Vijums agreed stating if the area was heavily screened the public would not be able to see
the activities that occur within the expanded patio area. He stated he would not be in favor of any
type of screening. He noted he also supported leaving the size of the outdoor recreational space at
1,500 square feet.
Commissioner Weber reiterated that he was not comfortable with the City writing code that was
only for one business in the community. He suggested a conditional use permit be considered
versus rewriting City Code.
Community Development Director Jagoe explained if the Commission were to require the
applicant to receive a conditional use permit, this recommendation would be considered by the
City Council and the applicants would have to come back and apply for an outdoor commercial
use as a conditional use.
Commissioner Weber questioned if the applicant had a contractor lined up for the outdoor patio
expansion.
Adam Flaherty, 1273 West County Road E, explained he did have a contractor lined up for the
patio work. He noted the patio season in Minnesota was limited and he would like to have the
work done and ready for the 2023 season.
Commissioner Weber stated he was concerned with the fact the new language was too
restrictive. He supported the use being opened to other businesses in the community in order to
allow restaurants to have outdoor patios.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – April 5, 2023 6
Community Development Director Jagoe explained the language could be amended, striking
Item A, which would then allow other businesses to have an outdoor patio because they were a
commercial use in the B-2 zoning district.
Commissioner Weber believed this was a reasonable change to the language.
Chair Vijums reported the Commission would have to also take into consideration how this
language could be interpreted for the TCAAP property.
Commissioner Bjorklund commented he was still concerned about amplification of sound and
requested that no amplification of noise be allowed on the outdoor patio.
Commissioner Mitchell suggested the outdoor patio be tied to a decibel level.
Community Development Director Jagoe reported noise standards per City Code would have
to be followed for the outdoor patio.
Chair Vijums stated he did not believe it was necessary to restrict the decibel level for the patio
area.
Commissioner Weber asked if Bethel University or Mounds View High School had a special
permit to allow for the amplification of noise on their property.
Community Development Director Jagoe explained she would have to review their stadium
renovation requests. She understood the sound was projected in a specific manner so as to reduce
the impact on the neighboring residential properties and as part of the stadium approvals there
were limitations on types of events and hours.
Commissioner Wicklund reviewed the language that was included in the Bethel University
stadium request noting the sound system installed was to meet all EPA and MPCA standards.
Commissioner Collins stated he did not believe the same volume would be created on an
outdoor patio as was being generated by the football stadium.
Commissioner Bjorklund commented on how difficult it was to enforce noise concerns and
stated he would have to rely on the owner’s best judgement to manage the noise coming from the
outdoor patio.
Chair Vijums opened the public hearing at 7:29 p.m. The Planning Commission received one
written comment that was submitted by Kim Sawtell, 3637 Hamline Avenue N., in advance of
the meeting in support of the application as requested.
Chair Vijums invited anyone for or against the application to come forward and make comment.
There being no additional comment Chair Vijums closed the public hearing at 7:30 p.m.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – April 5, 2023 7
Commissioner Weber moved and Commissioner Blilie seconded a motion to strike the
language within Item A from the draft Attachment H - Zoning Code Amendment,
Accessory Uses . The motion carried unanimously (7-0).
Chair Vijums moved and Commissioner Weber seconded a motion to recommend approval
of Planning Case 23-007 as amended for a Site Plan Review at 1273 West County Road E
and Zoning Code Amendment to Section 1305.04 – Definitions, Section 1320.05 – Land Use
Chart and Section 1325.02 – Accessory Uses based on the findings of fact and the submitted
plans, as amended by the conditions in the April 5, 2023, report to the Planning
Commission. The motion carried unanimously (7-0).
B. Planning Case 23-005; 4300 Round Lake Road W and 1987 Gateway Boulevard –
Site Plan Review – Public Hearing Not Required
Community Development Director Jagoe stated the Applicant has submitted a land use
application for a Site Plan Review, seeking flexibility on the size wall signs at two Delkor office
buildings. The two buildings are located in Sign District 7, which allows a wall sign with a
maximum size of 45 square feet. The Applicant is proposing one (1) 60 square foot wall sign on
the western elevation of each building.
Community Development Director Jagoe explained at its January 17, 2023 meeting, the City
Council considered a request for a Concept Plan Review for the proposed wall signs. At this
meeting, the Council expressed general support for the requested flexibility in wall sign size. At
this meeting, Planning Staff presented the City Council with a second option to amend the Sign
Code. The City Council briefly discussed the undertaking of amending the sign ordinance. Given
the Applicant’s desired timeline for sign installation, they are pursuing the application for Site
Plan Review based on the Council’s feedback.
Community Development Director Jagoe reported the Applicant was recently approved for a
Planned Unit Development Amendment at a third location they occupy at 4200 Round Lake
Road. At their August 22, 2022 meeting, the City Council approved a request for wall signage
with a 60-square-foot copy area on three elevations at the new Gateway building subject to sign
standards under Sign District 6. The Applicant has indicated the proposed signage would be
consistent and conform to the approvals at 4200 Round Lake Road.
Community Development Director Jagoe indicated the Applicant is proposing 60 square foot
signage that will match the wall signs at their 4200 Round Lake Road location. Planning Staff
would add that the new construction of the Gateway Interstate building at 4200 Round Lake
Road was approved on October 12, 2020 as part of a Planned Unit Development that included
sign district flexibility. The sign flexibility that the Applicant is seeking under this proposal for
the Subject Properties would be initiated through the Site Plan Review process. The review
process type is different because the Subject Properties are existing buildings that are operating
in accordance with city code requirements under the Gateway Business Zoning District as
allowed without a Planned Unit Development. A Planned Unit Development is an overlay district
utilized on land use reviews for residential and commercial subdivisions, new developments, or
redevelopments that will function as one entity or may include flexibility to design standards.
Not all properties in the City function as part of a Planned Unit Development. Rather there are
historical uses (i.e. permitted use, conditional use, special use, legal nonconforming, etc.) that are
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – April 5, 2023 8
allowed to continue until such time that there is a change in use or modification to the site or
building that triggers an additional zoning/land use review.
Community Development Director Jagoe reviewed the site data, surrounding area, the Plan
Evaluation and provided the Findings of Fact for review:
1. The Applicant has submitted an application for Site Plan Review to ins tall 60 square foot
wall signage on the western elevations of two Delkor office buildings at the subject
properties, 4300 Round Lake Road W and 1987 Gateway Boulevard.
2. The Subject Properties are located in the Gateway Business District and are guided as
Light Industrial & Office on the 2040 Land Use Plan.
3. Adjustments to the requirements and standards for the height, number, type, lighting,
area, and/or location of a sign or signs established by this Chapter may be approved with
a Site Plan Review or a Planned Unit Development process as described for in Section
1320 and 1355 of the Zoning Code.
4. Flexibility through the Site Plan Review process has been requested for the size of the
proposed wall signs.
5. The proposed signage plan does not conflict with the general purpose and intent of the
Zoning Code or the Comprehensive Development Plan for the City.
6. The application is not anticipated to create a negative impact on the immediate area or the
community as a whole.
7. The proposed plan will not produce any permanent noise, odors, vibration, smoke, dust,
air pollution, heat, liquid, or solid waste, and other nuisance characteristics.
8. A public hearing is not required for Site Plan Review.
Community Development Director Jagoe reviewed the options available for Planning Case 23-
005 to the Planning Commission on this matter:
1. Recommend Approval with Conditions
1. That the project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted. Any
significant changes to these plans, as determined by the Community Development
Director, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission and City
Council.
2. A separate sign permit shall be required for all proposed signage.
3. All signage shall meet all other requirements of Sign District 7.
2. Recommend Approval as Submitted
3. Recommend Denial
4. Table
Chair Vijums opened the floor to Commissioner comments.
Chair Vijums asked if the City was proposing to change the recommended sign sizes or
dimensions, or would variances be considered over time.
Community Development Director Jagoe described the process that was laid out for the
applicant noting a Site Plan Review was before the Planning Commission at this time and not an
Ordinance Amendment for the sign code.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – April 5, 2023 9
Chair Vijums questioned if the proposed sign was 60 square feet in size.
Kevin Weiss, 4300 Round Lake Road West, reported both signs would be 60 square feet in size,
which was identical to the signs at 4200 Round Lake Road.
Community Development Director Jagoe explained the signs at 4200 Round Lake Road were
approved as part of the Gateway Interstate Building.
Commissioner Bjorklund stated he liked that the new sign size would allow the property to be
seen from the freeway and would create unification. He indicated he would like to see the site
having identification signs installed on the site.
Mr. Weiss commented site would have directional signs on the building.
Commissioner Wicklund explained he believed the criteria for the sign code has been satisfied
and for this reason he would be supporting the request.
Chair Vijums stated because similar signage was approved for an adjacent building, he would
be supporting this request.
Community Development Director Jagoe commented further on how the proposed signage
would be consistent between the Delkor buildings.
Commissioner Bjorklund recommended a finding be stated to this effect.
Chair Vijums suggested this finding read: the proposed signage would conform and unify the
existing Delkor signage.
Commissioner Bjorklund moved and Commissioner Weber seconded a motion for Findings
of Fact Item 9 to read: The proposed signage would conform and unify the existing Del kor
signage. The motion carried unanimously (7-0).
Commissioner Wicklund moved and Commissioner Collins seconded a motion to
recommend approval of Planning Case 23-005 for a Site Plan review at 4300 Round lake
Road W and 1987 Gateway Boulevard based on the findings of fact as amended and the
submitted plans, as amended by the conditions in the April 5, 2023, report to the Planning
Commission. The motion carried unanimously (7-0).
C. Planning Case 23-006; 3610 Snelling Avenue N – Site Plan Review – Public
Hearing Not Required
Community Development Director Jagoe stated Lindey’s Prime Steakhouse opened in Arden
Hills in 1961. The City established the Neighborhood Business District on September 27, 1999.
Neighborhood Business sites are located at the edge of residential neighborhoods and are
intended to provide a limited range of over-the-counter, convenience, retail, and service uses to
accommodate the needs of the adjacent residents. Since these areas are located adjacent to
residential neighborhoods, the City did adopt limitations on the type, size and intensity of uses
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – April 5, 2023 10
within this district. On November 27, 2000, the City rezoned seven sites, including the Subject
Property, to NB, Neighborhood Business District. Today, the Subject Property is considered legal
nonconforming in this district.
Community Development Director Jagoe explained the Applicants are applying for Site Plan
Review for evaluation of the site layout and parking modifications that are being proposed as a
result of the operational changes impacted by the County Road E/Old Snelling Avenue
Roundabout project. There are no changes to the restaurant operations or the building as part of
this application. As a legal nonconforming site, the County has allowed the continuation of use of
the two driveway accesses along Old Snelling Avenue and one access off of County Road E. The
access off of County Road E is a smaller commercial/residential driveway. With the roadway
project, the Applicants are required by Ramsey County to eliminate one of the driveway accesses
along Old Snelling Avenue in order to bring the property closer to conformance with current
County standards. Thus, the proposed parking lot improvements have triggered the Site Plan
Review process for reconfiguration of the site layout.
Community Development Director Jagoe reported the Subject Property is approximately 1.5
acres which includes both a restaurant, a residential home, and a detached cottage. The main
parking lot is located in the western and central portions of the lot. The site has significant tree
canopy coverage with more green areas on the southern and eastern portion of the property. The
parking lot reconfiguration will occur essentially within the same footprint that exists today with
the exception of the addition of parking spaces between the building and eastern property line.
For the Site Plan review, the proposed improvements include elimination of the southern most
access on Old Snelling Avenue, upgrading the driveway access off of County Road E to full
commercial standards, and the addition of parking stalls and a trash enclosure.
Community Development Director Jagoe reviewed the surrounding area, site data, the Plan
Evaluation and provided the Findings of Fact for review:
1. The Applicants have submitted an application for Site Plan Review at 3610 Snelling
Avenue N. to resurface and reconfigure their existing parking lot that would include as
part of the project scope the addition of a parking area along County Road E.
2. The Subject Property is located within the Neighborhood Business (“NB”) District and is
guided as Low Density Residential on the 2040 Land Use Plan.
3. The Subject Property was developed prior to the City’s adoption of the Neighborhood
Business District and is considered legal nonconforming as the existing parking lot does
not comply with current city code requirements.
4. Through the Site Plan Review, the Applicants are seeking approval to resurface and
restripe the existing portion of the parking lot within the same footprint.
5. The Applicants are proposing to add approximately 7,073 square feet of new impervious
surface for an additional 13 parking spaces on the east side of the Subject Property.
6. Flexibility through the Site Plan Review process as allowed in the NB District is
requested for the following areas: buffer yards, parking setbacks, sidewalks, and
perennials and shrubberies.
7. The proposed plan does not conflict with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning
Code or the Comprehensive Development Plan for the City.
8. The application is not anticipated to create a negative impact on the immediate area or the
community as a whole.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – April 5, 2023 11
9. The proposed plan will not produce any permanent noise, odors, vibration, smoke, dust,
air pollution, heat, liquid, or solid waste, and other nuisance characteristics.
10. The proposed plan is not anticipated to have any impact on traffic or parking conditions.
11. The accessory off-street parking would be in compliance with all other provisions of the
Zoning Code.
12. A public hearing is not required for Site Plan Review.
Community Development Director Jagoe reviewed the options available to the Planning
Commission on this matter:
1. Recommend Approval with Conditions
1) That the project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted as
amended by the conditions of approval. Any significant changes to these plans, as
determined by the Community Development Director, shall require review and
approval by the Planning Commission and City Council.
2) The proposed parking area shall conform to all other regulations in the City Code.
3) A building permit shall be obtained for the parking lot expansion.
4) All light poles, including base, shall be a maximum of 14 feet in height and shall be
shoebox style, downward directed, with high-pressure sodium lamps or LED and
flush lenses. Other than wash or architectural lighting, attached security lighting
shall be shoebox style, downward directed with flush lenses. If complaints are
received the lighting adjacent to residential uses shall utilize house shields as
directed by the City. In addition, any lighting under canopies (building entries) shall
be recessed and use a flush lens.
5) All retaining wall materials shall be complementary to the building materials and
shall be approved in writing by the Planning Division prior to issuance of a building
permit. Retaining walls greater than four (4) feet in height shall be engineered and
detailed calculations shall be submitted to the City.
6) A Grading and Erosion permit shall be obtained from the City’s Engineering
Department prior to commencing any grading, land disturbance or utility activities.
The Applicants shall be responsible for obtaining any permits necessary from other
agencies, including but not limited to, Rice Creek Watershed District and Ramsey
County prior to the start of any site activities. Verification of approved permits or
documentation from other agencies that a permit is not necessary shall be provided
to the City.
7) A grading as-built and utility as-built plan shall be provided to the City upon
completion of grading and utility work.
8) Restaurant Pedestrian Trail Connection to be maintained by property
owner/business.
9) Provide geotechnical engineer recommendations and/or geotechnical report for
review by City Engineer.
10) Provide statement of estimated quantities (SEQ) sheet and separate items to be
funded by Owner and funded by County per the Funded Improvement Sketch plan
sheet that was provided to Council at the January 9th 2023 City Council Meeting.
2. Recommend Approval as Submitted
3. Recommend Denial
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – April 5, 2023 12
4. Table
Chair Vijums opened the floor to Commissioner comments.
Commissioner Weber asked who made the determination that the work was repair, replacement,
restoration or maintenance.
Community Development Director Jagoe stated in preparation of the application she
determined the site plan review process was the proper pathway. She explained the parking lot
was not being expanded, but rather three-fourths of the parking lot was being reclaimed. She
commented further on the flexibility that was allowed through the site plan review process.
Commissioner Weber reported this appeared to be a more invasive project because the entire
parking lot was being rebuilt. He was curious if this process was avoiding a jam that the property
owner would be in given the fact the property was legally non-conforming.
Commissioner Blilie stated she did not have big concerns noting this was a well established
business in the community that was being forced to do this work, for reasons out of their control
by Ramsey County. She reported Lindey’s was not pursuing this project of their own accord, but
rather was being forced.
Commissioner Weber asked if the City was cost participating in the sidewalk.
Community Development Director Jagoe stated the City and the County would be assisting
with a portion of the project improvements. She indicated the sidewalk would be part of the
roadway project scope.
Commissioner Weber believed the City and the County were being extremely generous in
covering the costs for this project. He did not believe the City should be paying for the sidewalk
to be redone.
Further discussion ensued regarding the proposed cost sharing for this project.
Commissioner Bjorklund explained he lived near Lindey’s. He asked if the City has received a
series of complaints regarding the parking, snow storage or lights from this restaurant.
Community Development Director Jagoe stated staff to her recollection has not received any
complaints regarding these topics.
Commissioner Bjorklund understood that the proposed project would cure and address some of
the non-conforming issues on the property. He stated he would be supporting the request noting
this business has been in the community for the past 61 years.
Commissioner Wicklund requested further information regarding the trees on the property.
Community Development Director Jagoe reviewed the size and location of the trees on the
site. She commented on the potential of a perimeter fence, but noted the applicant was not
committing to the fence at this time.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – April 5, 2023 13
Commissioner Wicklund stated it would be difficult to further screen the property given the
location and size of these mature trees.
Chair Vijums explained he was not proposing a fence be installed given the fact the residential
property to the north was not complaining. He appreciated the fact only two trees would be lost
on the site and recommended no additional screening be required.
Paul Schrader, SRF Consulting, thanked staff for all of their assistance on this project. He noted
he had reviewed the conditions and his only concern was with Condition 5. He clarified for the
record there would be no retaining walls on the Lindey’s property, but rather a retaining wall
would be installed as part of the roadway project and would be installed by the roadway
contractor. He explained this retaining wall would be on a portion of land the County would be
purchasing from Lindey’s and the retaining wall would be maintained by the County going
forward. For this reason, he requested Condition 5 be removed from consideration.
Mark Lindemer, Lindey’s representative, thanked the Commission for considering his request.
He reported he has received no feedback from the neighboring properties regarding this project.
He stated it was his hope to have some type of screening along the north property line at some
point in the future.
Commissioner Weber asked if there would be any updates planned for the home on the
property.
Mr. Lindemer stated general maintenance would be done at this point.
Chair Vijums noted the applicant would like Condition 5 struck from the Site Plan Review due
to the fact the County would be installing the retaining wall.
Commissioner Collins moved and Commissioner Mitchell seconded a motion to strike
Condition 5. The motion carried unanimously (7-0).
Chair Vijums moved and Commissioner Wicklund seconded a motion to recommend
approval of Planning Case 23-006 as amended for Site Plan Review at 3610 Snelling
Avenue North based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, as amended by the
conditions in the April 5, 2023, report to the Planning Commission. The motion carried
unanimously (7-0).
UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS
Community Development Director Jagoe introduced Senior Planner Elena Fransen to the
Planning Commission.
REPORTS
A. Report from the City Council
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – April 5, 2023 14
Councilmember Rousseau provided the Commission with an update from the City Council. She
explained racial covenants were discussed at the Council’s last worksession meeting.
B. Planning Commission Comments and Requests
None.
ADJOURN
Chair Vijums moved, seconded by Commissioner Wicklund, to adjourn the April 5, 2023,
Planning Commission Meeting at 8:37 p.m. The motion carried unanimously (7-0).
Page 1 of 10
PC Agenda Item – 3A
MEMORANDUM
DATE: May 3, 2023
TO: Planning Commission Chair and Commissioners
FROM: Jessica Jagoe, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Planning Case #22-025 – Public Hearing Required
Applicant: Kerri Seemann
Property Address: 1947 County Road D West
Request: Zoning Code Amendment and Conditional Use Permit
Requested Action
Kerri Seemann (“Applicant”) has submitted an application for a Conditional Use Permit to allow
a Class II Accessory Home Occupation at 1947 County Road D West (“Subject Property”). The
Applicant is proposing to operate a landscaping nursery as an accessory home occupation on the
Subject Property. A home occupation is allowed in residential zoning districts, but a Conditional
Use Permit is required as a Class II Accessory Home Occupation when there is an employee not
residing in the residence or the delivery of products. A zoning code amendment to Chapter 13 –
Zoning Code of Arden Hills City Code is required for this application to strike language that
conditions a home occupation to be conducted entirely within the dwelling and that there shall be
no exterior evidence of the home occupation. The Applicant is proposing ordinance language be
added to allow for a home occupation to be conducted either within a detached accessory
structure or exterior of a building.
Background
1. Existing Site Conditions:
1947 County Road D West (“Subject Property”) is zoned R-2, Single & Two Family Residential
District, and is designated for Low Density Residential Uses in the 2040 Comprehensive Land
Use Plan. The Subject Property is developed with a single-family residential dwelling and
detached garage as well as a second detached accessory shed. All surrounding parcels are also
zoned R-2, Single & Two Family Residential District, and designated for Low Density
Residential Uses in the 2040 Comprehensive Land Use Plan.
Page 2 of 10
2. Site Data
2040 Future Land Use
Plan: LDR – Low Density Residential
Existing Land Use: Single Family Dwelling and Accessory Detached Structures
Zoning: R-2 Single and Two Family Residential District
Lot Size: 0.45 acres
Aerial of Subject Property
Proposed Use:
The Applicant submitted a Conditional Use Permit application to allow a Class II Accessory
Home Occupation on the Subject Property for the operation of a landscaping nursery. The
company’s business activities would specialize in the growing of native plants from germination
to retail sales. All retail sales of plants will be conducted online. By appointment only,
customers will pick up their merchandise that will be stored outside adjacent to the house. The
Applicant indicates this may be up to one customer per day. Generally, the Applicant would be
the only employee, but occasionally during the spring/summer season, it is proposed that the
Page 3 of 10
accessory home occupation would have one employee that does not reside in the residence to
assist in the business activity. The Applicant has stated that off-street parking of two to three
vehicles can be accommodated on the existing driveway. Additionally, there would be the
occasional delivery anticipated to be up to three per year that is attributed to the home
occupation. No advertisement shall be placed on the property.
At its January 17, 2023 meeting, the City Council considered a request for a Concept Plan
Review for the proposed home occupation and text amendment. At this meeting, there was a
Council consensus on a home occupation being an opportunity for residents to start a small scale
business. The Council expressed a willingness to consider text amendment language that may
remove certain barriers. There were general comments during the meeting that CUP’s running
with the property as well as what other types of home occupations may result from an ordinance
amendment or with an approved CUP how does that pertain to subsequent owner(s).
Approvals:
1. Conditional Use Permit
A Conditional Use Permit is required for Class II Accessory Home Occupations. A home
occupation is allowed in residential zoning districts as an accessory use, but it becomes a Class II
Home Occupation when there is an employee that does not reside in the residence and/or the
delivery of products associated with the business activity. City Code Section 1355.04 Subd. 3 of
the Arden Hills Zoning Code lists the criteria for evaluating a Conditional Use Permit. The
Planning Commission and City Council should consider the effect of the proposed use upon the
health, safety, convenience and general welfare of the owners and occupants of the surrounding
land and the community, in general, including but not limited to the following factors:
1. Existing and anticipated traffic and parking conditions;
2. Noise, glare, odors, vibration, smoke, dust, air pollution, heat, liquid or solid waste, and
other nuisance characteristics;
3. Drainage;
4. Population density;
5. Visual and land use compatibility with uses and structures on surrounding land;
6. Adjoining land values;
7. Park dedications where applicable;
8. Orderly development of the neighborhood and the City within the general purpose and
intent of the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Development Plan for the City.
Under state law, a conditional use is a use that is generally allowed in a designated district upon
the applicant demonstrating that the standards and criteria stated in the ordinance will be
satisfied. Conversely, if the applicant is unable to show that the ordinance standards are met, the
application can be denied, but because the use is listed as permitted, the City’s discretion is more
limited in these matters than in a comprehensive plan or rezoning application.
Plan Evaluation
1. Chapter 13, Zoning Code Review
Page 4 of 10
Section 1325 – General Regulations, 1325.02 Accessory Uses, Subd. 3 Home Occupations
A. Home occupations are allowed as either accessory uses or conditional uses depending on the
characteristics of the operation. All home occupations shall comply with the following
conditions:
1. It shall not result in traffic, parking, noise, light, fumes and odors to such an extent that it is
noticeable that the property is being used for non-residential purposes.
The Applicant has indicated the proposed home occupation will not result in increased
traffic or a need for additional parking. Any retail sales are stated to be conducted
online and customers would pick up their plants by appointment only. The Applicant
states that the existing driveway will provide enough space for customers to park when
selecting and picking up plants. There is space in the driveway for two – three cars to
park, and the Applicant expects no more than one patron per day. This activity started
as a hobby for personal purposes and has grown to the proposed home occupation as a
result of customers asking her to sell the native plants. It is not anticipated that the
proposed business will produce any noise, light, fumes, or odors to the extent that it is
noticeable that the property is being used for commercial purposes.
2. It shall be conducted entirely within the dwelling.
The proposed home occupation does not comply with this condition and is part of the
text amendment request included as part of this application. Due to the nature of the
business as a native plant supplier, most business-related activities will take place
outside where the plants are to be grown. The plants would be grown on up to 15 – ten-
foot wooden benches with molded plastic bench tops that would be arranged in the rear
yard depending on sun/shade needs. There would be about 20 square feet of the
detached garage used to store growing supplies as well as a 20 square foot area adjacent
to the dwelling/garage that would be for order assembly and customer pickup.
According to the Applicant, the amount of space to be used inside the home is limited to
computer use—approximately 1% of the total floor area. The Applicant has noted that
she already discussed the addition of garden areas with neighboring property owners to
the north and west, as they will be most impacted by the changes. According to the
Applicant, both neighbors expressed support.
3. There is no exterior evidence of the home occupation.
The proposed home occupation does not comply with this condition and is part of the
text amendment request included as part of this application. Since the business involves
growing plants, the business activity would be conducted not within the dwelling, but
primarily in the yard with some storage of supplies in the garage. Although the
Applicant is already growing many plants for personal use and the current garden is
already noticeable from the street, the Applicant is proposing to grow more. The
Applicant intends to add wooden benches with molded plastic bench tops, to get the
plants off the ground, approximately at knee-height. These would go in parts of the
yard that are close to water access and where they would cause the least damage to
Page 5 of 10
existing lawn and flower beds. The Applicant is not proposing any external advertising
on the property noting that there is a business being operated on the property. Photos
of the exterior dwelling are included as an attachment.
4. It does not require any special entrances to the dwelling.
The proposed home occupation will not require any additional entrances to the
dwelling. No structural changes to the property will be required.
B. Class II Conditional Accessory Home Occupations. Home occupations may be allowed by
Conditional Use Permit as regulated in Section 1355.04 Subd 3.C.1 if they meet the conditions
stipulated above for all Home Occupations and the following conditions:
1. The primary business activity shall be conducted by an occupant of the residence;
The Applicant is an owner and taxpayer of the Subject Property and the owner of the
proposed home occupation—Prior Plants.
2. One person not residing in the residence may be employed to assist in the business activity;
The company is a small scale operation and currently does not employ any persons not
residing in the residence. The Applicant states in her narrative that there is a
possibility that a maximum of one other employee, not residing in the residence, would
be needed during the spring/summer (busy season). Therefore, planning staff has
included this as part of the CUP request for the proposed Class II Home Occupation.
3. It does not occupy more than thirty-three (33) percent of the floor area of the dwelling;
Activities related to the proposed home occupation will primarily take place in the rear
and side yards of the Subject Property. The Applicant notes the space used within the
home for business-related purposes will be limited to computer use. The Applicant
expects to use the computer for ordering and communication. The Applicant will use
nearby desk space for record keeping and short term seed storage. The total floor area
of the home is 1,321 square feet. The Applicant proposes using 13 square feet (1% of
floor area) for business purposes.
4. It has a limited number of patrons visiting the premises;
The Applicant has stated that business will be conducted on an appointment-only basis.
Using this method, the Applicant expects to limit the number of patrons visiting the
proposed home occupation to no more than one patron per day.
5. Off-street parking for no more than two (2) additional vehicles other than those required by
the occupants shall be permitted. On-street parking shall not be used to satisfy required
parking; and,
The proposed home occupation will not result in the need for any off-street parking.
The Applicant states that the business would not result in traffic that is inconsistent
with a residential neighborhood due to the limited number of patrons. Business sales
would take place online and orders would be picked up by appointment only. The
existing driveway can accommodate two - three parked vehicles, and the Applicant
expects no more than one patron per day.
Page 6 of 10
6. It requires delivery of products to the premises no more than once per day.
The proposed home occupation is a small-scale business. The Applicant expects only
three deliveries per year by FedEx or UPS. The deliveries will include cases of pots,
packs of seeds, and other gardening-related items.
C. Class II Conditional Accessory Home Occupations. Applications for a Class II Home
Occupation as stipulated by Section 1355.04 Subd 3.C.2 shall be accompanied by the following
information:
1. A photograph of the residence. Included in submission
2. A floor plan indicating the floor area to be used by the home occupation along with a
tabulation of the total floor area and the floor area to be used for the home occupation.
Included in submission
3. A statement describing the home occupation and the compliance with the required
conditions. Included in submission
4. A copy of the state or county license or permit if such a license or permit is required by the
state or county for the proposed home occupation. The proposed business does not require
a state or county license or permit. This requirement is not applicable.
2. Sign Code – Chapter 12
This approval does not include signs. Staff recommends adding a condition that prohibits signage
as part of the approval.
Zoning Code Text Amendments
According to the Applicant, the proposed ordinance amendments will remove obstacles to some
home occupations/businesses that cannot easily be conducted within the dwelling, such as
woodworking, ceramics, or market gardening. Her narrative provided an example of restrictive
language for the Planning Commission to consider that would establish certain prohibited uses to
reduce the risk of potential problems that could arise with allowing business activity outside of the
home.
Currently, the city code requires all home occupations to be conducted entirely within the dwelling
and have no exterior evidence of the home occupation. In a review of home occupations
ordinances for several adjacent communities, staff found there were a handful that allowed the
business activity to be conducted in a detached accessory building, but found no examples that
allowed for exterior evidence. Staff has prepared text amendments based on the Applicant’s
narrative as well as a few other text amendment considerations for Section 1325.02, Subd. 3 -
Home Occupations.
Applicant’s Narrative:
1) Amend Section 1325.02, Subd. 3. A to read:
• Class I Home Occupations shall be conducted entirely within the dwelling.
o Administrative Approval
Page 7 of 10
• Class II Home Occupations may be conducted within a detached accessory
structure or exterior of a building.
o Conditional Use Permit
2) Amend Section 1325.02, Subd. 3.C, Class II Home Occupation to read:
• It does not occupy more than 33% of the floor area of the dwelling or accessory
building.
3) Amend Section 1325.02, Subd. 3.A to move Item #3 “There is no exterior evidence of
the home occupation.” specific to Class I Home Occupations.
4) Amend Section 1325.02, Subd. 3.C to add “The home occupation and the conduct
thereof shall not impair the residential character of the premises nor impair the
reasonable use, enjoyment, and value of other residential property in the
neighborhood.”
Additional Code Amendments to consider:
1) Amend Section 1325.02, Home Occupations
a. Add language under Class II Home Occupations to define parameters to the percentage
of outdoor activity allowed, location (i.e. rear yard only, screened from roadway,
adjacent to dwelling, etc.), or requirements for screening.
Draft optional language for Planning Commission consideration:
• The accessory home occupation includes a supplemental exterior display or storage of
products and/or materials area that will be located behind the front building line of the
dwelling and does not exceed a total of 1,500 square feet.
• A screening plan is required for a Class II Accessory Home Occupation that includes an
exterior display area or storage of products and/or materials. Acceptable forms of
screening are a six (6) foot tall solid wood, composite, or vinyl fence or vegetation that
shall consist of plantings that shall provide for a year round screening and installed at a
minimum of six (6) feet tall. Screening shall be installed around the perimeter of the
home occupation display/storage area or encompasses a portion of the property to achieve
adequate screening. Fencing shall be subject to the regulations in Section 1325.05, Subd.
4.D.
• The area exterior of the dwelling or detached accessory building identified on the
approved CUP site plan may not be utilized for outdoor sales of products.
b. Create 1325.02, Subd. C.3 that adds language to specify the types of home occupations
strictly prohibited.
Draft optional language for Planning Commission consideration:
D. Prohibited Uses. The following Accessory Home Occupations are prohibited without
limitation: motor vehicle service, recreational vehicle service, small engine repair, or
manufacturing.
Additional Review
N/A
Page 8 of 10
Suggested Findings of Fact
Staff offers the following findings of fact for consideration:
1. The Subject Property located at 1947 County Road D is zoned R-2, Single and Two Family
Residential District and is designated for Low Density Residential uses on the 2040
Comprehensive Plan.
2. A home occupation is allowed in residential zoning districts, but a Conditional Use Permit
is required when there is an employee that does not reside in the residence and/or the
delivery of products.
3. The Applicant is the sole owner and operator of Prior Plants, a business related to growing
Minnesota native plants.
4. All company retail activity is conducted exclusively online.
5. By appointment only, customers will be visiting the Subject Property to pick-up their
orders from a designated area as shown on the site plan submitted by the Applicant.
6. The company may have one employee that does not reside in the residence assist in the
business activity.
7. The company requires the occasional delivery of items attributed to the business activity.
8. The company is a small scale operation and is solely owned and operated by the Applicant,
Kerri Seemann.
Text Amendment Findings:
1. Kerri Seemann, The Applicant, is proposing amendments to the language of Chapter 13 –
Zoning Code of the City Code for Home Occupations.
2. Currently, Section 1325.02 does not allow for an accessory home occupation to be
conducted outside of the dwelling or have exterior evidence.
3. The Applicant is proposing the City amend the zoning code to add language to allow an
accessory home occupation to be conducted either in a detached accessory building or
outside of a building.
4. The proposed amendments continues to support a home occupation as an accessory use in
residential zoning districts by establishing standards that enforces and protects the
character of the residential neighborhood with exterior size restrictions and screening
buffers.
5. Amendments to the Zoning Code regulations require a public hearing prior to action by
the City Council.
6. If the zoning amendments were approved, an Applicant would be required to apply for a
Class II Accessory Home Occupation Permit.
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.
Page 9 of 10
1. Recommend Approval with Conditions: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 22-
025 for a Conditional Use Permit to allow a Class II Accessory Home Occupation at 1947
County Road D and Zoning Code Amendments to Section 1325.02, Subd. 3 – Accessory Uses
based on the findings of fact and submitted plans, as amended in the conditions in the May 3,
2023, Report to the Planning Commission:
a) The Applicant shall conducted the home occupation in accordance with the narrative
and site plans submitted. Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by the
Community Development Director, shall require review and approval as a Conditional
Use Permit Amendment by the Planning Commission and City Council.
b) There shall be no more than one employee that does not reside in the residence
employed to assist in the business activity.
c) Delivery of products will be limited, but in no instance shall it be more than once per
day.
d) No exterior signage shall be permitted.
e) There shall be no more than one patron per day by appointment only visiting the
premise to pick up their order.
f) All home occupation retail sales must be exclusively conducted online.
g) The Applicant must apply annually and obtain an Accessory Home Occupation
Permit from the City.
h) A screening plan shall be provided to the City for approval by the Community
Development Director prior to issuance of an Accessory Home Occupation Permit.
i) A Zoning Permit would be required for the installation of any new fencing.
j) The exterior business activity shall be limited to the Applicant’s description and site
plans as submitted. All exterior evidence of the home occupations shall not exceed
1,500 square feet of the Subject Property.
2. Recommend Approval without Conditions: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case
22-025 for a Conditional Use Permit to allow a Class II Accessory Home Occupation at 1947
County Road D and Zoning Code Amendments to Section 1325.02, Subd. 3 – Accessory Uses
based on the findings of fact and submitted plans in the May 3, 2023, Report to the Planning
Commission.
3. Recommend Denial: Motion to recommend denial of Planning Case 22-025 for a Conditional
Use Permit to allow a Class II Accessory Home Occupation at 1947 County Road D and
Zoning Code Amendments to Section 1325.02, Subd. 3 – Accessory Uses 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 22-025 for a Conditional Use Permit to allow a Class II
Accessory Home Occupation at 1947 County Road D and Zoning Code Amendment to Section
1325.02, Subd. 3 – Accessory Uses for the following reasons: the Planning Commission should
identify a specific reason and/or information request should be included with a motion to table.
Notice and Public Comments
Page 10 of 10
Notice was published in the Pioneer Press on April 20, 2023. Notice was prepared by the City
and mailed to property owners within 1000 feet of the subject property. As of April 27, 2023,
staff has received one public comment in opposition to the application due to the exterior
evidence of the home occupation.
Deadline for Agency Actions
The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on April 3, 2023.
Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, the City must act on this request by June 2, 2023 (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. Land Use Application
B. Location Map
C. Applicant CUP Narrative
D. Applicant Text Amendment Narrative
E. Site Plans
F. Draft Home Occupation Ordinance Amendments
Location Map
Tax Parcels _Query result
Personal Property
Tax Parcels
Cities
County Offices
4/26/2023, 2:00:58 PM 0 0.06 0.120.03 mi
0 0.1 0.20.05 km
1:3,600
Ramsey County
Ramsey County MN
●In section 1325.02 of the city code (Accessory Uses),under Subdivision 3 (Home Occupations),I
would like the council to consider moving line A.2.(“It shall be conducted entirely within the
dwelling.”)to part B (Class I Accessory Home Occupations).
○This would allow business activity outside the home (in an accessory structure or
elsewhere on the property),but only as a Class II Conditional Accessory Home
Occupation.
●Also in 1325.02,Subdivision 3,under part C (Class II Conditional Accessory Home Occupations),
I would like the council to consider amending line 1.c (“It does not occupy more than thirty-three
percent of the floor area of the dwelling”)to say “It does not occupy more than thirty-three percent
of the floor area of the dwelling or accessory building.”
●In section 1325.02 of the city code (Accessory Uses),under Subdivision 3 (Home Occupations),I
would like the council to consider moving line A.3.(“There is no exterior evidence of the home
occupation.”)to part B (Class I Accessory Home Occupations).
●If that were to change,I would also suggest adding a line to part C.1.stating that “The home
occupation and the conduct thereof shall not impair the residential character of the premises nor
impair the reasonable use,enjoyment,and value of other residential property in the
neighborhood.”
I believe that these changes are necessary to remove obstacles to some businesses that cannot be easily
conducted within the dwelling,such as:
●Wood working
●Ceramics
●Market gardening (flower,vegetable,egg production)
Restrictive Language
I understand that changing the code to allow business activity outside the home also has the potential to
create problems and restrictive language would be needed to reduce that risk.Here are some examples
from the zoning code of Bloomington:
“Prohibited Uses.The following home businesses are prohibited without limitation:motor vehicle or boat
repair;small engine and major household appliance repair,motor vehicle or boat service;painting or
repair of motor vehicles or boats,the sale,lease,or trade of firearms or ammunition,manufacturing,
taxidermy shops,unlicensed massage or escort businesses.”
“Exterior storage or display of equipment or materials,tools,supplies,stock-in-trade,products or
by-products used or produced in conjunction with the home business is prohibited.”
“All business activity associated with the home business must be conducted entirely within the principal
residential dwelling unit with no more than 25%of the total gross floor area (GFA)of the principal
residential dwelling unit (excluding garage space)utilized for the home occupation.The City Council may
approve home business activities in accessory structures if it finds that typical residential activities in the
neighborhood are not adversely impacted or that the home business operation in an accessory structure
would not alter the residential character of the neighborhood.”
Draft Accessory Home Occupation Ordinance Amendments
Subd. 3 Home Occupations. Home occupations are allowed as either accessory uses or conditional
uses depending on the characteristics of the operation.
A. All home occupations shall comply with the following conditions:
1. It shall not result in traffic, parking, noise, light, fumes and odors to such an extent that it is
noticeable that the property is being used for non-residential purposes.
2. It shall be conducted entirely within the dwelling or detached accessory building.
3. There is no exterior evidence of the home occupation from the right-of-way or adjacent
properties.
4. It does not require any special entrances to the dwelling.
B. Class I Accessory Home Occupations.
1. Home Occupations will be permitted as accessory uses if they meet the conditions stipulated in
the home occupation definition and following conditions:
a) The business is engaged only by the occupants of the premis-es;
b) The business activity does not occupy more than twenty-five (25) percent of the gross floor
area of the dwelling;
c) There will be no patrons visiting the premises;
d) It requires no delivery of products other than those delivered by private passenger vehicle.;
e) There shall be no portion of the business activity including storage that is occurring within a
detached accessory structure or exterior of a building.
2. Applicants for Class I Accessory Home Occupations shall be required to obtain an Accessory
Home Occupation Permit from the City prior to engaging the activity. Review by the Planning
Commission and City Council is not required. Application forms as prescribed by the Administrator shall
be accompanied by the following information:
a) A photograph of the residence;
b) A floor plan indicating the floor area to be used by the home occupation along with a
tabulation of the total floor area and the floor area to be used for the home occupation;
c) A statement describing the home occupation and the compliance with the required
conditions; and,
d) A copy of the state or county license or permit if such a license or permit is required by the
state or county for the proposed home occupation.
C. Class II Conditional Accessory Home Occupations.
1. Home occupations may be allowed by Conditional Use Permit as regulated in
Section 1355.04 Subd 3 if they meet the conditions stipulated above for all Home Occupations and the
following conditions:
a) The primary business activity shall be conducted by an occupant of the residence;
b) One person not residing in the residence may be employed to assist in the business activity;
c) It does not occupy more than thirty-three (33) percent of the floor area of the dwelling or
accessory building;
d) It has a limited number of patrons visiting the premises;
e) Off-street parking for no more than two (2) additional vehicles other than those required by
the occupants shall be permitted. On-street parking shall not be used to satisfy required parking; and,
f) It requires delivery of products to the premises no more than once per day.
g) The accessory home occupation includes a supplemental exterior display or storage of
products and/or materials area that will be located behind the front building line of the dwelling and
does not exceed a total of 1,500 square feet.
h) A screening plan is required for a Class II Accessory Home Occupation that includes an
exterior display area or storage of products and/or materials. Acceptable forms of screening are a six (6)
foot tall solid wood, composite, or vinyl fence or vegetation that shall consist of plantings that shall
provide for a year round screening and installed at a minimum of six (6) feet tall. Screening shall be
installed around the perimeter of the home occupation display/storage area or encompasses a portion
of the property to achieve adequate screening. Fencing shall be subject to the regulations in Section
1325.05, Subd. 4.D.
i) The area exterior of the dwelling or detached accessory building identified on the approved
CUP site plan may not be utilized for outdoor sales of products.
2. Applicants for Class II Conditional Accessory Home Occupations shall follow the procedures
prescribed in the Conditional Use Permit section of Appendix A, Procedure Manual. The application shall
be accompanied by the information required for Class I Home Occupations in Section 1325.02 above and
a site plan showing any additional parking or other modifications to the site required to accommodate
the home occupation. A copy of any required State or County license or permit as discussed in Class I
Home Occupations shall be submitted prior to the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit, however,
evidence that the proposed Home Occupation meets all the requirements for State or County licenses or
permits shall be submitted with the Conditional Use Permit application.
3. In reviewing applications for Class II Conditional Accessory Use Permits for Home Occupations
the City shall consider criteria which affect the appropriateness of a particular use in the location
proposed, as discussed in Section 1355.04 Subd 3 and Appendix A, Procedural Manual.
D. Prohibited Uses. The following Accessory Home Occupations are prohibited without limitation:
motor vehicle service, recreational vehicle service, small engine repair, or manufacturing.
Page 1 of 6
PC Agenda Item – 3B
MEMORANDUM
DATE: May 3, 2023
TO: Planning Commission Chair and Commissioners
FROM: Elena Fransen, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: Planning Case #23-008 – No Public Hearing Required
Applicant: Joshua Haberman
Property Location: 1475 Dawn Circle
Request: Variance
Requested Action
Joshua Haberman (“Applicant”) has requested a variance to construct a garage addition on the
property located at 1475 Dawn Circle (“Subject Property”). The Applicant has requested a
variance to decrease the required total side yard setback from 25 feet to 20.33 feet. The proposed
addition would encroach 4.75 feet into the required 14.75-foot setback from the east property line
of the Subject Property.
Background
1. Existing Site Conditions
1475 Dawn Circle, the Subject Property, is zoning R-1, Single Family Residential District. It is
designated for Low Density Residential in the 2040 Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The Subject
Property is the site of a single-family dwelling owned by the Applicant. All surrounding parcels
are also zoned R-1, Single Family Residential District and designated for Low Density Residential
Uses in the Land Use Plan.
2. Site Data
2040 Future Land Use
Plan: LDR – Low Density Residential
Existing Land Use: Single Family Dwelling
Zoning: R-1, Single Family Residential District
Lot Size: 0.32 acres
3. Proposed Use
Page 2 of 6
The Applicant is requesting a variance to decrease the required total side yard setback of his single-
family dwelling on the Subject Property from 25 feet to 20.33 feet for a proposed third stall garage
addition. Section 1320.06 of the Arden Hills City Code requires a combination of both side yards
on an interior lot of not less than 25 feet.
According to the Applicant’s narrative submitted as a part of his application, the Subject Property
includes unique circumstances due to its nontraditional shape and its location at the end of a cul-
de-sac. The Applicant is requesting the proposed garage addition as, according to the Applicant,
the current garage cannot accommodate the storage of two cars due to how the steps into the house
are arranged. The proposed garage addition would meet applicable building codes and all other
regulations in the R-1 District. The Applicant would not be able to construct the proposed garage
addition without a variance.
4. Approvals
The Planning Commission is being asked to determine if a variance request for flexibility on the
total side yard setback should be approved. The submitted sketches show the location of the
proposed garage addition and the proposed driveway addition. 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.
Plan Evaluation
Chapter 13, Zoning Regulations Review
1. District Provisions (R-1 Single Family Residential District) – Section 1320.06
Lot Size and Dimensions – Meets Requirements
The Subject Property was constructed in 1983 with a lot area of 14,068 square feet (Attachment
D). Section 1320 – District Provisions of the Zoning Code requires a minimum lot size of
14,000 square feet per single-family dwelling unit.
Page 3 of 6
Structure Setbacks – Variance Requested
In the R-1 District, the minimum front and rear setback requirements are 40 feet and 30 feet,
respectively. The minimum side yard setback is 10 feet and the minimum total of both side yards
on a lot is 25 feet. The current structure complies with the minimum setback requirements in the
R-1 District.
The proposed third stall garage addition would have a side yard setback of 10 feet as measured
from the east property line. Today, the existing side yard setback is 18.33 feet. The Applicant is
requesting a variance to decrease the required total side yard setback from 25 feet to 20.33 feet.
The proposed garage addition would conform to front, rear, and one minimum side yard setback
requirements.
Existing Proposed Garage Addition
Front Setback 41.16 feet 41.16 feet
Rear Setback 37 feet 30.66 feet
Side Yard Minimum (west) 10.33 feet 10.33 feet
Side Yard Total Both Side Yards 25 feet 20.33 feet
Landscaped Area – Meets Requirements
In the R-1 District, the minimum landscaped area required without a variance is 65% of the
property or 9,144 square feet. The Subject Property has an existing landscaped area of 10,492
square feet or 75%. The proposed addition would decrease the total landscaped area to 9,507
square feet, or 68% percent of the property.
Structure Coverage – Meets Requirements
The R-1 District allows for a maximum structure coverage of 25% or 3,517 square feet of the
Subject Parcel. The existing structure coverage is 2,556 square feet or 18%. The proposed addition
would increase the total structure coverage by 495 square feet for a total of 3,051 square feet, or
22% of the Subject Property.
2. Variance Review
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, 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 exceed the front setback limit, any conditions
attached should presumably relate to mitigating the effect of the encroachment.
Page 4 of 6
3. Variance Requirements – Section 1355.04, Subd. 4
The Applicant requests a variance to construct a third stall addition to the side of their existing
attached garage that would impede on the required total side yard setback in the R-1 Residential
District. 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 1475 Dawn Circle is for a proposed garage addition. The Subject
Property is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential District and is guided as Low Density
Residential on the Land Use Plan.
2. Practical Difficulties. The Applicant for a variance shall establish that there are practical
difficulties in complying with the provisions of the Arden Hills Zoning Regulations. The term
“Practical Difficulties” as used in the granting of a variance means:
a. Reasonable Use. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner
not permitted by the Zoning Ordinance.
According to the Applicant, a third car garage stall for a single family home is a reasonable
use of the Subject Property in the R-1 Zoning District because the design of the existing
two car garage does not accommodate the Applicant’s needs to store two cars
simultaneously.
b. Unique Circumstances. The plight of the property owner is due to circumstances unique to
the property not created by the landowner.
According to the Applicant, the Subject Property’s irregular shape creates a practical
difficulty due to the curvature of the parcel’s front property line. The Subject Property
was platted in 1982 and the dwelling was constructed in 1983. The Applicant purchased
the Subject Property in 2022 so they did not create the circumstances unique to the
property.
c. Character of Neighborhood. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character
of the neighborhood.
According to the Applicant, the variance requested is in keeping with the character of the
city. The existing neighborhood has homes with a variety of different garages and housing
styles, and the proposed variance would not alter the character of the neighborhood.
3. Economic Consideration. Economic consideration alone does not constitute a practical
difficulty.
Page 5 of 6
The Applicant states that the proposed variance is not requested for economic reasons.
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 variance request to the required R-1 Zoning
District total side yard setback at the Subject Property 1475 Dawn Circle.
2. A single-family dwelling is a permitted use within the R-1 Zoning District.
3. The garage addition will not impede sight lines or obstruct the clear vision area from the
roadways.
4. The proposed garage addition would decrease the required total side yard setback to 20.33
feet.
Variance Findings:
1. Variances are only permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and
intent of the ordinance.
2. The proposed garage addition would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood
because the configuration on the Subject Property would be consistent and compatible with
the neighborhood.
3. The variance request is not based on economic considerations alone.
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
23-008 for a Variance at 1475 Dawn Circle, based on the findings of fact and the submitted
plans, as amended by the conditions in the May 3, 2023, Report to the Planning
Commission:
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.
• Recommend Approval as Submitted: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 23-
008 for a Variance at 1475 Dawn Circle, based on the findings of fact and the submitted
materials in the May 3, 2023, Report to the Planning Commission.
Page 6 of 6
• Recommend Denial: Motion to recommend denial Planning Case 23-008 for a Variance at
1475 Dawn Circle, based on the following findings: findings to deny should specifically
reference the reasons for denial and why those reasons cannot be mitigated.
• Table: Motion to table Planning Case 23-008 for a Variance at 1475 Dawn Circle: a
specific reason and information request should be included with a motion to table.
Notice
Although a variance does not require a public hearing, a public meeting notice was prepared by
the City and mailed to properties within 500 feet of the Subject Property on April 20, 2023. A
public hearing notice for this planning case was published in the Pioneer Press on April 20, 2023.
Minnesota statute does not clearly require a public hearing before a variance is granted or denied,
however, after consulting with the City Attorney, staff agree that the best practice is to allow public
forum on all variance requests. A public forum allows the city to establish a record and elicit facts
to help determine if the application meets the practical difficulties factors.
Staff has not received any written or verbal comments regarding this proposal as of April 26, 2023.
Deadline for Agency Actions
The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on March 21, 2023.
Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, the City must act on this request by May 20, 2023 (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.
The City provided the Applicant with written notification extending the review period to July 19,
2022 (120 days) based on the date of the submission for review by the Planning Commission and
City Council during the May meeting cycle. The requestor confirmed receipt of this notification
on March 21, 2023.
Attachments
A. Land Use Application
B. Location Map
C. Variance Request Letter
D. Site Survey & Renderings
Location Map
Personal Property
Tax Parcels
Cities
County Offices
2022 Aerial
Red: Band_1
Green: Band_2
Blue: Band_3
4/18/2023, 3:06:48 PM
0 0.03 0.050.01 mi
0 0.04 0.080.02 km
1:1,200
Ramsey County
Ramsey County MN
70' - 2"117' - 7 1/4"1 0 4 ' - 9 1 /4 "Setback10' - 4"4 6 ' - 0 "45' - 8 7/8"110' - 9 1/8"18' - 4"41' - 2 3/8"37' - 0"14' - 8" Setback30' - 0" Setback15' - 0"10' - 0"7' - 5"33' - 0" Proposed garage add.40' - 0" Setback30' - 8"13' - 0"EXISTING GARAGEEXISTING HOUSEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEProposed garage additionFenceDRIVEWAY840 sfSIDEWALK180 sfSHED103 sfRETAINING WALLSFenceHouse, garage and stoops = 2,453 sf495 sfLot area = 14,068 sfExisting hardcover = 3,576 sfProposed garage addition = 495 sf Proposed driveway addition = 490 sfTotal proposed hardcover = 4,561 sfProposed hardcover percentage = 33%DRIVEWAY ADD.490 sfDAWN CIRCLEScaleDateADVANCED DRAFTING AND RES. DESIGN INC1146 EDGEWATER AVEARDEN HILLS, MN 55112651-341-79111" = 20'-0"A2SiteHaberman3/21/20231475 Dawn CircleArden Hills, MN 55112Haber_1d1" = 20'-0"1Site Plan 2
2' - 0"9' - 0"2' - 0"13' - 0" Garage addition32' - 11" Garage addition7' - 5"BrickBrickGARAGE ADDTIONEXISTING GARAGEEXISTING HOUSEStucco24' - 3 1/2"14' - 3"UPDN3' - 0"17' - 7"25' - 4"16' - 0"10' ceiling8'-11" ceilingBeamCut opening in wall, add beam above13' - 0"7' tall overhead sectional doorScaleDateADVANCED DRAFTING AND RES. DESIGN INC1146 EDGEWATER AVEARDEN HILLS, MN 55112651-341-79113/16" = 1'-0"A1Garage Plan, ViewsHaberman3/21/20231475 Dawn CircleArden Hills, MN 55112Haber_1d3/16" = 1'-0"1Garage 223D View 133D View 2
First Floor43' -5 13/16"First Plate51' -6 15/16"Garage41' -5 13/16"T.O. House Roof70' -3"T.O. Exg GarageRoof60' -10 13/16"T.O. New GarageRoof61' -5 11/16"19' - 5"19' - 11 7/8"28' - 9 1/4"ScaleDateADVANCED DRAFTING AND RES. DESIGN INC1146 EDGEWATER AVEARDEN HILLS, MN 55112651-341-79113/16" = 1'-0"A3Front ElevationHaberman3/21/20231475 Dawn CircleArden Hills, MN 55112Haber_1d3/16" = 1'-0"1South
Page 1 of 9
PC Agenda Item – 3C
MEMORANDUM
DATE: May 3, 2023
TO: Planning Commission Chair and Commissioners
FROM: Jessica Jagoe, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Planning Case #23-009 – No Public Hearing Required
Applicant: CathX Medical, Inc.
Property Location: 1275 Red Fox Road
Request: Sign Standard Adjustment (Site Plan Review)
Budgeted Amount: Actual Amount: Funding Source:
N/A N/A N/A
Requested Action
CathX Medical, Inc. (“The Applicant”) has submitted a land use application for Sign Standard
Adjustment through the Site Plan Review process for the property located at 1275 Red Fox Road
(“Subject Property”). The Applicant is seeking flexibility on the size and lighting of signage in
order to install an 89.05 square foot wall sign on the south side of the building and an internally
illuminated monument sign on the southeast corner of the property. The Subject Property is
located in Sign District 7, which allows wall signs with a maximum sign copy area of 45 square
feet and monument signs that are externally illuminated. The Subject Property is located in the I-
FLEX Zoning District and is guided as Mixed Business in the Land Use Plan.
Background
1. Overview of Request
The Applicant has submitted a land use application for a Site Plan Review, seeking flexibility on
the size of a proposed wall sign and the lighting style of a proposed monument sign. The Subject
Property is located in Sign District 7, which allows a wall sign with a maximum size of 45
square feet and externally illuminated monument signs. The Applicant is proposing an 89.05
square foot wall sign on the southern elevation of the building. A second 89.05 square foot wall
sign will also be installed as permitted on the northern elevation of the building previously
approved in Planning Case #04-09. The proposed wall sign will comply with all other
requirements of Sign District 7. The Applicant is also proposing an internally illuminated
Page 2 of 9
monument sign to replace the existing monument sign on the property. Sign District 7 only
allows for externally illuminated monument signs. The proposed monument sign will comply
with all other requirements of Sign District 7.
2. Planning Case Background
In 2004, the City Council approved Planning Case #04-09—a Sign Standard Adjustment for a 90
square foot wall sign on the northern elevation of the Subject Property. The Applicant is now
requesting a second Sign Standard Adjustment for an 89.05 square foot wall sign on the southern
elevation of the Subject Property to match the wall sign allowed on the northern elevation. In
2004, the property owner requested flexibility from the sign code due to the building’s setback
from Interstate 694 and Snelling Avenue—approximately 250 yards. The property owner
petitioned that a 45 square foot wall sign, as permitted in Sign District 7, would not be visible
from these two roadways. On May 24, 2004, the City Council unanimously approved this request
for a 45 square foot sign standard adjustment, subject to the following condition:
1. Should the sign require building work, the applicant shall file the necessary building
permits with the City Building Official for approval prior to the issuance of a building
permit.
The Sign Standard Adjustment was approved because of the following findings:
1. There are site conditions which require a sign adjustment to allow the sign to be
reasonably visible from a street immediately adjacent to the site.
2. The sign adjustment will not result in a sign that is inconsistent with the purpose of the
zoning district in which the property is located.
3. Site Data
Future Land Use Plan: Mixed Business
Existing Land Use: Office
Zoning: I-FLEX District
Size: 5.00 Acres
4. Existing Conditions
The Applicant, CathX Medical, uses the Subject Property shown below for office and
manufacturing purposes. According to the Applicant’s narrative, Zeus Industrial Products, Inc. is
the sole shareholder of CathX Medical. The shareholders of Zeus are the sole shareholders of
Champlain Associates Arden Hills, LLC which purchased the Subject Property. Per the
company’s corporate branding standards, CathX Medical utilizes the “Z” and “Zeus” logos on all
properties and intend to include it on the Subject Property in Arden Hills as well.
The Subject Property located in the I-FLEX Zoning District, which is part of Sign District 7. All
surrounding properties are also located in the I-Flex Zoning District and Sign District 7. The
Subject Property is guided as Mixed Business in the 2040 Land Use Plan. The properties to the
Page 3 of 9
east and west of the Subject Property are also guided as Mixed Business. The property is
bordered by Interstate 694 to the north. The property to the south is guided as Light Industrial &
Office.
Aerial Map of Subject Property
Sign District 7, applicable to the Subject Property, allows for wall signage with a maximum sign
copy area of 45 square feet. The building located on the Subject Property does not currently
contain any wall signage since the property had been vacant for several years prior to the
purchase by Champlain Associates Arden Hills, LLC. There is an existing monument sign that
does not contain any lettering or logos. There is an address sign that reads “1275” on the eastern
building elevation. As part of this sign proposal, the Applicant is proposing an 89.05 square foot
wall sign on the north building elevation to match the previously approved wall sign on the south
building elevation. The proposed 89.05 square foot wall sign on the north building elevation
could be approved administratively with a sign permit since the Subject Property was approved
the variance under Planning Case #04-09.
Several surrounding properties have received variances for various types of signage over the
years. The table below summarizes the variances granted to properties near the Subject Property
that are also in Sign District 7.
Address
Case
Number Variance Type Description
1235 Red Fox Road PC #77-014 Monument Sign
Location
Setback variance for a monument sign
that has since been removed.
3900 Northwoods
Drive PC #86-021 Monument Sign
Location
Setback variance for a monument
sign.
Page 4 of 9
3900 Northwoods
Drive PC #91-018 Additional Wall
Sign
Variance to construct a wall sign for a
single business in a multi-tenant
buidling.
3920 Northwoods
Drive PC #88-034 Monument Sign
Size and Location
Variance to construct a monument
sign within the required setback and
at a greater height and size than
permitted.
3920 Northwood
Drive PC #88-037 Monument Sign
Height
Variance to construct the monument
size from PC 88-034 at 35 feet rather
than the permitted 16 feet.
3920 Northwood
Drive PC #11-002 Monument Sign
Height
Variance to increase the height of the
freestanding sign abutting I-694 from
16 feet to 35 feet.
1125 Red Fox Road PC #81-007 Monument Sign
Height
Variance to increase the height of the
freestanding sign abutting I-694 from
16 feet to 30 feet.
1300 Red Fox Road PC #92-018 Wall Sign Size
Variance to construct a wall sign with
a copy area greater than allowed in
Sign District 7.
Approvals
1. Site Plan Review
The Applicant is proposing to construct wall signage with an 89.05 square foot sign copy area on
the southern elevation and an internally illuminated monument sign on in the southeastern corner
of the Subject Property. To construct this size of wall signage and a monument sign with this
type of illumination system, the Applicant is looking for flexibility from the City Code, Chapter
12 – Sign Code through the Site Plan Review process. Adjustments to the requirements and
standards for the height, number, type, lighting, area, and/or location of a sign or signs
established by this Chapter may be approved with a Site Plan Review or a Planned Unit
Development process as described for in Section 1320 and 1355 of the Zoning Code. Sign
District 7, applicable to Subject Properties, allows for wall signage with a maximum sign copy
area of 45 square feet and monument signs that are externally illuminated.
Plan Evaluation
Chapter 12, Sign Code Review
1. Sign Standards by Sign District – Section 1240.02, Subd. 1 – Wall Sign
The Subject Property is located in Sign District 7. Sign District 7 includes all properties in the I-
Flex, Gateway Business, or other commercial or industrial district without frontage on a
designated roadway (i.e. County Road E or Lexington Avenue). Sign District 7 allows for wall
signs with a sign copy area of no more than 45 square feet. The Applicant is proposing an 89.05
Page 5 of 9
square foot wall sign on the southern elevation of the Subject Property. The Applicant is
requesting flexibility to allow an additional 45 square feet of wall signage to construct the
proposed wall sign. The proposed wall signs would be internally lit with LED-illuminated letter
sets, as permitted in Sign District 7. The proposed wall sign will be identical to an approved wall
sign on the northern building elevation. An 89.05 square foot wall sign will be approved on the
north elevation due to an approved Sign Standard Adjustment for the Subject Property that the
City Council approved in 2004.
2. Sign Standards by Sign District – Section 1240.02, Subd. 2 – Freestanding Pole or
Monument Signs
Sign District 7 allows for monument and pole signs of up to eight feet in height with a total sign
copy area of 25 square feet. The sign area of a freestanding sign shall only be calculated using one
side of the sign. If the two sides are different sizes, the larger side shall be used for determining
sign area. The Applicant is proposing a five-foot tall monument sign with a sign copy area of 9.62
square feet. The total area of a freestanding sign shall not exceed 1.5 times the permitted sign copy
area of a freestanding sign, equal to 37.5 square feet in Sign District 7. The total sign area includes
all sign copy, graphics, decorative features, borders, and structural supports except for the poles.
The Applicant is proposing a total sign area of 37.5 square feet. The Applicant has submitted a
proposed sign plan that differs slightly from the provided monument sign renderings in the
placement of address text (see Attachment E). The text location, font, and size of the address will
be verified during the sign permit process to comply with Sign District 7 standards.
No more than one freestanding sign shall be permitted on any site except in cases where properties
front more than one public street. For properties that front more than one public street, an additional
freestanding sign may be permitted for each street front provided that each additional freestanding
sign does not exceed half the size of the maximum sign area allowed for a freestanding sign in the
underlying sign district. The Applicant is proposing one monument sign on the Subject Property.
Freestanding signs shall be located at least five feet from any property line and shall not project
over the property line. The proposed monument sign location will remain the same, which is more
than five feet away from the property line.
Monument signs in District 7 are only permitted to be illuminated externally. The Applicant is
requesting flexibility on lighting to allow for the proposed monument sign to be an internal
illumination/lighting style.
Page 6 of 9
3. Sign Standard Adjustments – Section 1260.01
The Applicant requests flexibility on the size and lighting of the proposed signs. City Code Section
1260.01, Sign Standard Adjustments states “adjustments to the requirements and standards for the
height, number, type, lighting, area, and/or location of a sign or signs established by this Chapter
may be approved with a Site Plan Review or a Planned Unit Development process.” In order to
approve an adjustment, the Planning Commission will need to make a determination that the
following criteria in the sign code has been satisfied:
1. Subd. 1 There are site conditions which require a sign adjustment to allow the sign to be
reasonably visible from a street immediately adjacent to the site.
According to the Applicant, CathX Medical, Inc. is not seeking Sign Standard
Adjustments based on site conditions relating to reasonable visibility. A variance was
issued to the site in 2004 to increase the north-facing wall sign copy area to 90 square
foot due to visibility concerns from I-694 and Snelling Ave. The Applicant intends to use
the existing variance for the north-facing wall sign. It is noted that the sign standard
adjustment would provide an architecturally consistent appearance for the building.
2. Subd. 2 The sign adjustment will allow a sign of exceptional design or a style that will
enhance the area or that is more consistent with the architecture and design of the site.
According to the Applicant’s narrative, both of the requested sign standard adjustments
are intended to enhance the design and appearance of the property while keeping
architectural consistency:
Page 7 of 9
a. As noted in their narrative, the Applicant is requesting a sign standard adjustment
to internally illuminate the monument sign. It is their intention to keep the same
dimensions and location of the current monument sign, which complies with the
requirements of District 7. The Applicant states they are seeking to enhance the
monument sign design by utilizing internal illumination to project a professional
appearance for our employees, customers, vendors and visitors, especially in the
evening.
b. As noted in their narrative, the Applicant is requesting a sign standard adjustment
for the south-facing wall sign to allow for an approximately 90 square foot sign
copy area to maintain architectural consistency with the existing wall signs on the
building to enhance the design and appearance of the property. The building has
an existing “1275” sign which is of scale and proportion that match the size of
the building. The Applicant notes they intend to match the scale and proportion of
the south-facing wall sign to the existing “1275” sign as both signs would be
visible from the main entrance to the parking lot simultaneously. An
approximately 90 square foot sign copy area on the south-facing building sign
would also match the sign copy area on the north-facing building sign adding to
the consistency of the building appearance, enhancing the professional nature of
the CathX Medical business.
3. Subd. 3 The sign adjustment will not result in a sign that is inconsistent with the purpose
of the zoning district in which the property is located or the current land use.
According to the Applicant, “being surrounded by commercial properties in the I-FLEX
district, an internally illuminated monument sign of Sign District 7 compliant dimensions
and a wall sign of consistent scale and proportions to the existing wall sign would
enhance the level of professional appearance to the property, representing the high-tech
nature of our medical manufacturing business.” It would also fit with similar signage at
businesses which are located near the intersection of Red Fox Road and Lexington
Avenue while meeting the intended purposes of the I-FLEX district to support a
combination of office, light industrial, manufacturing and service retail uses.
1355.04 Procedural Requirements for Specific Applications
Section 1355.04, Subd. 5 of the Arden Hills Zoning Code states that a public hearing is not required
for Site Plan Review, but neighboring property owners shall be notified. Notification was prepared
in accordance with City policy.
Additional Review
N/A
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. City Staff offers the following findings for consideration:
Page 8 of 9
1. The Applicant has submitted an application for Site Plan Review to install a 90 square foot
wall sign on the southern elevation of the subject property, 1275 Red Fox Road.
2. The Subject Property is located in the I-FLEX Zoning District and is guided as Mixed
Business in the Land Use Plan.
3. Adjustments to the requirements and standards for the height, number, type, lighting,
area, and/or location of a sign or signs established by this Chapter may be approved with
a Site Plan Review or a Planned Unit Development process as described for in Section
1320 and 1355 of the Zoning Code.
4. Flexibility through the Site Plan Review process has been requested for the size of the
proposed wall sign and the lighting type of the proposed monument sign.
5. The proposed southern elevation wall sign would match the size of the northern elevation
sign that was previously approved through a Sign Standard Adjustment.
6. The proposed signage plan does not conflict with the general purpose and intent of the
Zoning Code or the Comprehensive Development Plan for the City.
7. The application is not anticipated to create a negative impact on the immediate area or the
community as a whole.
8. The proposed plan will not produce any permanent noise, odors, vibration, smoke, dust,
air pollution, heat, liquid, or solid waste, and other nuisance characteristics.
9. A public hearing is not required for Site Plan Review.
Proposed Motion Language
Staff has provided the following options and motion language for this case.
1. Recommend Approval with Conditions: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 23-
009 for Site Plan Review at 1275 Red Fox Road, based on the findings of fact and the submitted
plans, as amended by the conditions in the May 3, 2023, Report to the Planning Commission:
1) That the project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted. Any
significant changes to these plans, as determined by the Community Development
Director, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission and City
Council.
2) A separate sign permit shall be required for all proposed signage.
3) All signage shall meet all other requirements of Sign District 7.
2. Recommend Approval as Submitted: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 23-
009 for Site Plan Review at 1275 Red Fox Road, based on the findings of fact and the submitted
plans in the May 3, 2023 Report to the Planning Commission.
3. Recommend Denial: Motion to recommend denial of Planning Case 23-009 for Site Plan
Review at 1275 Red Fox Road, based on the following findings of fact: findings to deny should
specifically reference the reasons for denial.
4. Table: Motion to table Planning Case 23-009 for Site Plan Review at 1275 Red Fox Road: a
specific reason and/or information request should be included with a motion to table.
Page 9 of 9
Public Notice and Comments
Staff published a notice in the Pioneer Press as per City procedure on April 20, 2023. Public
notices were mailed out on April 20, 2023. The mailing was sent to neighbors within 500 feet of
the subject parcel. No comments have been received regarding this application as of April 26,
2023.
Deadline for Agency Actions
The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on April 14, 2023.
Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, the City must act on this request by June 13, 2023 (60 days),
unless the City provides the petitioner with written reasons for an additional 60-day review period.
The sixty (60) day timeline begins on the day the City is in receipt of what has been determined to
be a complete application. 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. Applicant Narrative
D. Site Plan
E. Monument Sign Plan
F. Wall Sign Plan
1275 Red Fox Road Location Map
Personal Property
Tax Parcels
Cities
County Offices
2022 Aerial
Red: Band_1
Green: Band_2
Blue: Band_3
4/17/2023, 3:34:50 PM
0 0.08 0.160.04 mi
0 0.1 0.20.05 km
1:3,600
Ramsey County
Ramsey County MN
April 14, 2023
City of Arden Hills
1245 West Highway 96
Arden Hills, MN 55112
Attn.: Jessica Jagoe
Community Development Director
Re: 1275 Red Fox Rd Sign Standard Adjustment
Dear Ms. Jagoe,
CathX Medical, Inc. located at 1275 Red Fox Road, Arden Hills, MN 55112 requests a
Sign Standard Adjustment for city ordinance section 1240.02, District 7, I-Flex Zone.
We request a Sign Standard Adjustment based on city ordinance section 1260.01,
Subd. B which states, “The sign adjustment will allow a sign of exceptional design or a
style that will enhance the area or that is more consistent with the architecture and
design of the site;”. Appendix A has been attached to show the site plan.
By way of background: Zeus Industrial Products, Inc. (Zeus) is the sole shareholder of
CathX Medical, Inc. The shareholders of Zeus are the sole shareholders of Champlain
Associates Arden Hills, LLC which purchased the property at 1275 Red Fox Rd. Per
our corporate branding standard, we utilize the oval “Z” and “ZEUS” logos on all of our
worldwide properties and intend to do so for the property in Arden Hills. It is customary
for Zeus to own our properties with the intent to maintain/enhance the properties for 30+
years to support our business growth.
CathX Medical, Inc. intends to meet the requirements of ordinance 1260.01 by the
following means:
• Subd. 1 “There are site conditions which require a sign adjustment to allow the
sign to be reasonably visible from a street immediately adjacent to the site;”
o CathX Medical, Inc. is not seeking Sign Standard Adjustments based on
site conditions relating to reasonable visibility.
o For reference: sign variance 04-09 was issued to the site in 2004 to
increase the north-facing wall sign copy area to 90 sq ft due to visibility
concerns from I-694 and Snelling Ave. We intend to use the existing
variance for the north-facing wall sign.
• Subd. 2 “The sign adjustment will allow a sign of exceptional design or a style
that will enhance the area or that is more consistent with the architecture and
design of the site;”
o CathX Medical, Inc. is requesting two sign standard adjustments, both of
which are intended to enhance the design and appearance of the property
while keeping architectural consistency:
1. We are requesting a sign standard adjustment to internally
illuminate the monument sign. It is our intention to keep the same
dimensions and location of the current monument sign, which
complies with the requirements of Zone 7. We are seeking to
enhance the monument sign design by utilizing internal illumination
to project a professional appearance for our employees, customers,
vendors and visitors, especially in the evening.
2. We are requesting a sign standard adjustment for the south-facing
wall sign to allow for ≤ 90 sq ft sign copy area to maintain
architectural consistency with the existing wall signs on the building
to enhance the design and appearance of the property. The
building has an existing “1275” sign which is of scale and proportion
that match the size of the building. We intend to match the scale
and proportion of the south-facing wall sign to the existing “1275”
sign as both signs would be visible from the main entrance to the
parking lot simultaneously. A ≤ 90 sq ft sign copy area on the
south-facing building sign would also match the sign copy area on
the north-facing building sign adding to the consistency of the
building appearance, enhancing the professional nature of the
CathX Medical business.
• Subd. 3 “The sign adjustment will not result in a sign that is inconsistent with the
purpose of the zoning district in which the property is located or the current land
use.”
o Being surrounded by commercial properties in the Zone 7 I-FLEX district,
an internally illuminated monument sign of Zone 7 compliant dimensions
and a wall sign of consistent scale and proportions to the existing wall sign
would enhance the level of professional appearance to our property,
representing the high-tech nature of our medical manufacturing business.
It would also fit with similar signage at businesses which are located near
the intersection of Red Fox Road and Lexington Avenue while meeting the
intended purposes of the I-FLEX district to support a combination of office,
light industrial, manufacturing and service retail uses.
Request with additional supporting information:
• We are requesting Sign Standard Adjustment to enhance the design of the
monument sign by adding subtle internal illumination to further represent the
high-tech medical manufacturing business that CathX will operate at this site.
The rendering shown in Appendix B generally describes the intended monument
sign.
o The monument is intended to be a 10”-12” deep cabinet with routed
aluminum face, painted white and backed with a 1/4'” acrylic, printed blue
and internal illumination showing the oval “Z” logo and “ZEUS” name and
the site address below.
• We are also requesting a Sign Standard Adjustment for the South-facing wall
sign to be consistent with the architectural design, scale and proportion of the
existing “1275” sign located on the south-east corner of the building. District 7
city ordinance allows 45sq ft sign copy area, which would result in mismatched
scale and proportion to the existing “1275” sign, both of which are visible from the
property entrance on Red Fox Road.
• We are requesting to increase the allowable sign copy area to ≤ 90sq ft to
provide an architecturally consistent appearance for the building. The rendering
shown in Appendix C generally describes the intended wall sign.
o The south-facing wall sign is intended to be 4” Deep Channel Letters with
white face, trim and returns and a sign copy area of approximately 89 sq ft
including the oval “Z” logo and “ZEUS” name and will include internal
illumination.
o For reference: The property is allowed ≤ 90 sq ft sign on the north-west
side of the building per variance 04-09 to enhance visibility to I-694 and
Snelling Ave.
Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any questions or need additional
information.
Regards,
David Kaufenberg
Operations Manager
Existing monument sign
•Plan to reuse the location
for new monument sign
•Requesting sign standard
adjustment for internal
illumination
≤ 90 sq ft wall sign allowable per variance 04-09
Existing “1275” sign
Requesting sign standard
adjustment for ≤ 90 sq ft wall
sign to match scale and
proportion of existing “1275”
sign
12” DEEP CABINET WITH ROUTED ALUMINUM FACE PAINTED
WHITE BACKED WITH ¼” ACRYLIC AND PRINTED BLUE
DAY/NIGHT VINYL 1ST SURFACE APPLIED
90”
40”
18”
81 ½”
17”
63”
3 ½”
9.62 sq ft
37.50 sq ft
South-facing wall sign (night)North-facing wall sign (night)
South-facing wall sign (day)North-facing wall sign (day)
249”
51 ½”
135”
31”
106”
89.05 sq ft 89.05 SQUARE FEET TOTAL
South-facing wall sign (day)South-facing wall sign (night)