HomeMy WebLinkAboutPCP 09-06-2006
Chair ~ 1245 W. Highway 96
David Sand ~HILLS Arden Hills, MN 55112
Commissioners 651.634.5120
Ken Bezdicek Arden Hills www.ci.arden-hills.mn.us
Clayton larson
Dave McClung Planning Commission
Liz Modesette
Roberta Thompson Wednesda , SE~pt. 6, 2006
Cia on Zimmerman
City Vision
A strong community that values our unique environment, our fiscal soundness,
and our tradition as a desiraole cit in which to live, work, and la.
Agenda
Planning Commission Convenes 7:00 PM
Call to Order
1. AGENDA
2. MINUTES
A. August 2, 2006 Meeting
3. PLANNING CASES
A. Planning Case 06-025; Site Plan Review; AMT Inc; 1300 Grey Fox Road - Not a Public Hearing
B. Planning Case 06-026; Preliminary Plat; Arlene Boutin; 1600 Lake Johanna Blvd - Public Hearing
4. UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS
A. 34XX Lake Johanna Landscaping Preliminary Review
,B. Boston Scientific Water Tower Signage
5. REPORTS
A. Report from the City Council
6. ADJOURNMENT
A quorum of the City Council may be present at this meeting.
Planning Cases are available online at:
http://www.ci.arden-hills.mn.us
.
~ <
" >
~ ~
8 ~ ro
y; ';;;' .... ~ E
't'. '11 "O.g -_
:> ~ ,'0 ~ :ID ~ ~
! :e ]j:I: ~ 5, ~ .~
~~~~i~ ~..,iO~ ~
~u tl'. .c",~~_,.* ~
... -- "C ...: III <:: ~ III u <1.1 ,.. 0
<II r:o ll:I ~!;:f :> ~ tii i;! ~ .c -
Jl~~gv>8.!i3=;J;Dc:f<l1 8
ffi!L '\'\~ [I " ~
L il[if"f:: "TI '~I Ejrfl'---1~~ 1-.1 __.1IllI II ~IfiPlIL;
~I'!- ' , ' 1m EC C
@Lliw:r~f;;;' ",,' ____J I ... d!;;
C/.' _ ~ ~1 4\tf, , 0 "'......
',,,,.,,,, -', /" I =" .
~k1 ~I '" ,. \ ::.~~:! ~:U ::::: '" <<3
~'J -, I 'f/I"* . , '"'''~C~, , -::s.;;;
""~rpi',,h : I I '~.,. "'""
~ ~.~ '.{I[%Jr I ....::1_
"""<J "+ ----1 I ~ ,-- ---- l c; c..~
.Y~,," I -.- "" , -- 00'"
V,K~Z~~'! I ~ I / iff.1 ITrrJifi ~ ~ : . . .:: g.g
I, ",I ~ 8%.. IJ "'" :i P- ~'O 0_
"'~11;; \ I j' \ I 0 e I-
fLj7,;~1'Ccmi_ I / Eli!\! = "m.;x" ~ ~ . ' l~ ~
:~ U ~ r- =3. ~~ ' ~~,,' ~e '" 2,1' E 8 ~ ~
, "=- L"" +- U " ," 1\ ".1: E
g, ,,' ~. I" = E ~ "I, ,~ . f' ," 0 ~
_ '... j"", ',- ,If@' I- e::: 3= Iii >" i" ~; u
'Jli=\7<~~ 'I - ::;; x.!!! "'" ' ~;;.2
I:llJ I ~,,,,,,'" 1/ .111 <(0) ,.-o~
.:: '0 ',' '",~,{i;;.,:, .~{? \.If ~/! ii;i I ~3+ '{ ,lL. ~ '" " ~ ag
.... 0 '~I 'u'.,.',~',..',:1i' \ ' " ". :'1 '. !lE. ,i<.! 1f121 It) >. -;), ,I ~ ~ '"
Q.) 0 " --"-", ." '~" ~1 ,"-"j. :.ii, U"'I '" C1) c: ~ "'W'. . 0 .... ;:3
ell Nx' ", h ~./ 1 ,.', '" (;.!!! , "',""'--<'; ~:: 11
~. x' '/ I.... CD D.. '" ~" "e<
~ '0,' I;, I. '.',' I... 0 g $ r--c- ... ~' ' ~ ~ ;;
1-0 ...... U IM.- ift,. u-C<'J.
C ~ t@imlii ~-'~' }.' ~ i..J>/ i, 1,'< D.. ~ Ul', ,v. ,~ ~~
o E ...'S?" L,. - 1.---'" -- ~
._ ~ ,,"0
~ d} ~ .. - ~ &i8
.~ e- ,. '" i ,ii,'} ,:;~,~ f ~ ~
S Vl, ',-7 ~~I."'." '" ~" _~'" c-;:~~.
t= -' .~ ", " I :;;;:""r;.' 1I~' "ki"','" ,., ,',' , +-- g g ~
.. en A'I ,'===--- ..-=
<!) ~J .. ~~
o en;' ~- -. '-"'., lob '1/)' " 1'~ g
U d. l'~ " I/J,joj ,'~;"" .. II ~'}\ '~ ~n
I:llJ bJ) =,@z " (l-:c'I'..".I~;:::: c: c: l.... i'{~" / ,'~, ~.O
C .S ,~J.:lJ-\-.J I ?)I', .", '~lh ~ .. c: \', ~\~, -..-,-., ;: ~ f;
._ C Y: ">t.1 -+11,: ..; ',::'::::;'--" ::::I 16 ca ..:;ir> 'ilc:TJ ,,; r:J ~ 3
C C'!1"',."""iEF::, " " ' I +1,;"""..,,' ,,'" "",',J?",;c, . 0 - J:: ~F.. " i5 IE 0
ct: /llKSiiACRI . "~i,._,~"!V/7..J.- me.. 0 .,>:X:wJf . c:..::u
:: p:; 1 /,//'~ t \ ,,,-{. -'~"", ",-,0)' , ~e i5
...... I "'.: . ""::\-'- ~ .... .. ~-~ co ~.: CD ~ : E..g<o=.
- 'K I , ' -f ", ' /.... N" "" ."~
~ / J '0, ifiiilililli, ~. ..~, []'",a,,,,,,', 0 E .. 1l:;;S
<:> ')4,.. .~~ ' _,i/"'"'} I E..J "Ec~
IV. '" '::~ "'''71'5 CD oroN
)/.&' ~i---- 0::0 g<l,)......
:>''10 /<4\, =-- do'!""" \' Il, "Q) 0 ~ E 2.
.,'1- ~ !W .r>:t:f/'" .%'8,- ~.._---~~. - ~ CD >'''':=:-
I-"'" H, . '~ ~ i .0/,#' :0' ': D.. a.. ~ ~ >.~
,-Ii /",V ~ I~ ~i::;..;-
Tf ~ 'c. .. WA"~\~ T~ -;; il g
IiJi (TJt?J< I " -,;;
--- ~;>;+i! ..c: .0
~Ctl'Cf' "'-"fi ~~. :~-- 1\.1
. ';=o~.u;;JcI~ ;" ~ ti~~~ ~" ?l ,'~ ~ ~
J \.~\<\~,\ ~";-,.A"~ ~'%l ~,,~:::\:!\ :----, !iT~
I f ok' pIy"'.""- '.1" '!X",,',.- ~.;,\\ ,0 " W p '1 ~,= v
, ~. "of:' ,en \ '-, -- '"
1f ..if"'--- -' -,;I' ,~ ' ~~, ,,=,f-'
,~";;,~Y7')::\ ..~ """'~r ,GL 7;t; \, ' ~"ci
'r~~~Vi!I' II \n~Ji',' "'go
hfl--"y,::;-: '\ -If:, OJ___:;;
[Sr i;;;7fir. ffilfJi g , I J . ~' '1~( " 3~~
I/riRilt/ lrl~:' ~/~~~ \" \ , ~ " '" ~ 1
, ~r '!1.0;, q"~" =' '"
! F 1t!. : _ ~ I "II .......\,\, ", '. =. ~,,',H g
I '! """""='" L.- i \ ~ ' ...,'\ ". ,~ u
/ Ii :.J(II[.JJ-\J'~~",!~" \ \, ',~i~iB ~ ~.
' T7 I .. lY~.: ~~ .. J'h: \,-----:-~ ~. i ~
?#~ I ,I' \ ~'- '~ 0:::
I HI,,". .. -~!;M;j~~,=. ~ \ \, 1! ~ ~~?" iii
K; '~'- 'f-rlffTl !5/rrrmn!':'St.L? I. ~ k- ~
,,~ ~~ - ~-!IS1111 IN ,jl!I"f":< h ,. :--,l/{{ s:
Message Page 1 of 1
Jackie Freppert
. From: Jackie Freppert
Sent: Thursday, August 31,200612:14 PM
To: timesaver02@aol.com; bob, fletcher@co,ramsey,mn,us; bulletin@lillienews.com;
cwilson@ctv15,org; dorrick@pioneerpress,com; dprobst@mspmac,org; focus@mnsun,com;
kmaltman@msn,com; mlsmith@startribune,com; smoran@startribune,com;
sschroeder@smithmicrotech,com
Subject: 9/6/06 Planning Commission Agenda
Jackie Freppert, Office Support Specialist
City of Arden Hills
Phone 651.634.5120
Fax 651.634.5137
www.ardenhillS.gOyoffice2.com
(
.
8/31/2006
----.--.---
~
. ~HILLS
Approved: DRAFT
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA
PLANNING COMMISSION
WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 2, 2006
7:00 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY HALL
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Sand called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Present were Commissioners Clayton Larson, Ken Bezdicek, Elizabeth Modesette,
Clayton Zimmerman, Roberta Thompson, David McClung, and Chair David Sand.
Absent: None.
. Also present were Mayor Beverly Aplikowski; Counci1member David Grant; Community
Developmcnt Director, Karen Barton; City Planner James Lehnhoff; and Recording
Secretary Kathleen Altman_
A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
HELD ON JULY 12,2006.
Commissioner Zimmerman movcd, seconded by Commissioner Larson to approve the
July 12, 2006 minutcs as prcsented.
The motion carried unanimously (7-0).
PLANNING CASES
A. PLANNING CASE #06-021: MINOR SUBDIVISION AND VARIANCE; BRUCE
AND KATHY HAGLUND, 3300 AND 3294 LAKE JOHANNA BOULEVARD
Mr.' Lehnhoff stated the applicants were requesting a minor subdivision and variance to
shift a portion of thc lot line between 3300 and 3294 Lake Johanna Boulevard to the
north to increase the lot size and shoreline width of the 3294 Lake Johanna property. The
variance is requested because the shoreline width for the 3300 Lake Johanna Blvd.
property would decrease from 95 feet to 75 feet, which is less than the minimum 85-foot
. shorelinc width requirement. He reviewed his analysis and recommended approval based
on the following conditions:
------
------------------
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION ~ AUGUST 2, 2006
DRAFT 2
L The applicant shall file the minor subdivision with Ramsey County within sixty .
days of the approval date or the approval shall expire.
2. The project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted as part of
the preliminary plat and variance application. Any significant changes to these
plans, as detcrmined by the City Planner, shall require review and approval by
the Planning Commission.
3. Any new construction on Parcel A or Parcel B shall conform to all requirements
of the R-2 Zone and the Shoreland Ordinance.
4. Thc applicant shall obtain any required permits from the Rice Creek Watershed
and supply the City with a copy before filing the lot split with Ramsey County.
5. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City Code and
related ordinances.
lIe indicated staff that an email datcd July 21, 2006 was received from Kim Klawiter,
3262 Sandeen Road, who indicatcd he supported the granting of this variance.
Commissioner Larson asked if the house on Lot B was encroaching. Mr. Lehnhoff
respondcd that home had received a variance a few years ago to encroach into the
sctback.
Chair Sand opened the public hearing at 7: II p.m.
Chair Sand invited anyone for or against the request to come forward and makc .
comment.
There were no public comments.
Chair Sand closed the public hearing at 7: 12 p.m.
Commissioner Bezdicek moved, seconded by Commissioner Thompson, to recommend
approval of Planning Case No. 06-021, Minor Subdivision and Variance, Bruce and
Kathy Haglund, 3300 and 3294 Lake Johanna Boulevard subject to the five conditions as
outlined in staff s July 10, 2006 report.
The motion carricd unanimously (7-0).
B. PLANNING CASE #06-022: PLANNING CASE 06-022. SITE PLAN REVIEW.
GREG PETERSON, 1105 AMBLE DRIVE
Mr. Lehnhoff stated thc applicant was requesting a site plan review to construct a six-foot
high fence in the front yard setback area along Lexington Avenue and ncar the
northwestern corner of Lexington Avenue and Amble Drive. He rcviewed his analysis
and recommended approval of the Site Plan Revicw for thc six foot high fence in the
front yard subjcct to the following conditions: .
-- DRAFT--
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - AUGUST 2,2006
DRAFT 3
. L The fence plans shall be modificd so that the fence is no closer than twenty feet to the
lot line corner that is near the intersection of Lexington Avenue and Amble Drive.
Any significant cbanges to these plans, as determined by the City Planner, shall
require review and approval by the Planning Commission.
2. Thc applicant shall locate the utilities near the proposed fence before the fcnce permit
is issued. The applicant shall comply with any setbacks set by the utility company,
though the fence shall not be moved any closer to Lexington A venue or Amble Drive
than the modified plans,
3. The fcncc shall not encroach on the public right-of-way. Thc applicant shall be
responsible for locating the lot lines prior to the issuance of the fence permit.
4. Before the face of the fence is installed, the location of the posts shall be measured by
the City Planncr to confirm that the posts arc in conformance with the fence plans as
modified hy condition I. The applicant shall be responsihle for contacting the City
Planner prior to the installation of the face of the fence.
S. The applicant shall keep the fence maintained and promptly repaired if any damage
occurs to thc fencc, including graffiti.
6. Thc applicant shall maintain the vegetation on both sides of the fcnce.
7. The fence shall not infringe on the lines of sight for Lexington Avenue and Amble
Drive. The fence pernlit shall be subject to approval by Ramsey County to ensure
that the lines of sight are protcctcd. If upon inspection the fence is found to impede
sightlines, the fcncc shall be movcd farther from the intersection.
. He not cd staff had not received any letters, emails, or telephone calls from thc property
owncrs or occupants in regard to this planning case.
Commissioner McClung moved, seconded by Commissioner Zimmerman, to approve
Planning Case No. 06-022, Greg Peterson, 1105 Amble Drive, subject to the seven
conditions as noted in staffs July 17,2006 rcport.
The motion carried unanimously (7-0).
C. PLANNING CASE 06-024: PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT
AND SITE PLAN REVIEW, BOSTON SClENTlHC, 4100 HAM LINE A VENUE
NORTH
Mr. Lehnhoff statcd thc applicant is proposing to construct a 10,225 square foot addition
to the west sidc of Building N. He reviewed his analysis and recommended approval of
the Planncd Unit Development Master Plan (7'h) Amendment and Site Plan Review based
on the submitted plans and fIndings of fact and subject to the following conditions:
L The applicant shall continue to ahide by the conditions of approval as stated in the
approved Master Plan P1JD except as amended by the six subsequcnt amendments.
2. A PUD Amendment form, drafted by the City Attorney, shall amend the PUD and
cncompass all seven amendments to the Master Plan PUD. A building pcrnlit may
. only he issued after the PUD Amendment document receives the approval ofthe City
Council and is executed by both the City Council and the applicant
-- DRAFT --
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION ., AUGUST 2, 2006
DRAFT 4
3. The project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted as part of the .
master plan amendment and site plan review application. Any significant changes to
these plans, as determined by the City Planner, shall require review and approval by
the Planning Commission.
4_ The master plan amendment and site plan review shall automatically expire and
become void onc (I) year from and after the date on which the Council granted such
approval if work on the project has not begun within that time period.
5. The applicant shall obtain any ncccssary pcrmits from Ricc Crcek Watershed, the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), and any other necessary permits
before a building pcrmit is issued. The City shall be copied with all required permits.
6. Any changes to the grading, erosion, or drainage plans shall be submitted to the City
Engineer for approval.
7. The applicant shall comply with conditions recommended by the City Engineer in the
July 24, 2005, memo to the City Planncr. Updated sitc plans shall be submitted for
approval by the City Engineer and Fire Marshal before any building pennits are
issued.
S. If noise from the building exceeds MPCA noise regulations for residential areas at the
property linc, the applicant shall reduce noise by any means necessary to be in
compliance with MPCA regulations. If any complaints regarding noise are made to
the City, the applicant shall bc rcsponsib1e for providing decibel measurements from
the property line.
9. A traffic study shall be conducted and submitted to the City for review to determine if
road improvcmcnts are needed prior to the submission of any application(s) that .
would cause the total new square footagc to cxceed 419,500 square fcet since thc
Mastcr Plan was approved in 2002-
10. The landscaping plan shall be modified so that at least 30 percent of the trees are in
the 3.5" to 4" caliper range and 20 percent of the trees are in the 4.5" to 5" caliper
rangc. The number of trees in the 2" to 3" caliper range shall not be more than 50
percent of the trees in the landscaping plan. The modified plan shall be submitted
prior to the issuance of any building permits and is subject to approval by the City
Planner.
II. The mechanical equipment shall be fully screened from all adjacent properties and the
public right-of-way.
12. The applicant shall provide four handicap access parking spaccs per the Americans
with Disabilities Act requirements.
]3, Thc applicant shall provide an "as built" survey upon completion of the project that
includes all required changes.
Chair Sand asked how many mature trees would be lost. Mr. Lehnhoff indicated the
rcpresentative from Boston Scicntific should be able to fully answer that question,
Chair Sand opened thc public hearing at 7:27 p.m.
Chair Sand invited anyone for or against the request to come forward and make
comment. .
-- DRAFT --
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - AUGUST 2, 2006
DRAFT 5
. Todd Vandeberg, 1266 Wynridgc Drive, stated he was not opposed to the addition, but he
had a concern with the existing noise. He noted his house backcd up to the air
conditioning and exhaust vents and they could hear the constant hum even with their
windows closed. He asked if they could ask the applicant to move the air conditioning
units somewhere else, or to build some type of a sound barrier/sound wall.
Mark Anton, 1263 Wynridge Drive, stated he had the same concerns as Mr. Vandeberg.
He believed the applicant has always been respectful of community concerns, but he
believed this equipment was put in thc worst area. He stated even with their windows
closed, thcy could hear the noise. He stated he was not opposed to thc addition, but was
opposed to the existing noise.
Judd Brasch, rcprcscntativc of Boston Scicntific, statcd therc was a cooling unit and
when it was originally installed it did produce more noise than expected and they had
attempted to suppress the noise. Hc noted the proposed addition on the west side had two
heights and it was their intent to put the new mechanical equipment on the new roof of
the lower building so it would be screened from the residential area by the higher
building. He indicated they were also considering moving the unit on the north and put it
on the same lower roof of the addition. He believed this would aid in increasing the
distance between the neighborhood and the mechanical equipment. He noted, however,
this had not been resolved yet and it would depend on the capacity needed. He stated the
northwest side of the addition would require the removal of a couple of trees, but he was
. not sure how many trees would need to come down.
Chair Sand asked if thcy would be willing to look at the noise issues of the existing air
conditioning units. Mr. Brasch responded they would look at this and attempt to resolve
the concerns. He stated they could look at additional steps to take.
Counci1member Larson noted condition 8 indicated if they exceeded the MPCA noise
level, applicant would be required to reduce the noise. lie asked if they agreed to do that
Mr. Brasch responded they would.
Chair Sand closed the public hearing at 7:35 p.m.
Commissioner Thompson stated even with condition 8, it would be that if it met the
requirements of MPCA that they would not need to make any adjustment so she
rccommended a revised condition 8. She believed as app1icanl continued to grow it was
important for the residents to be acceptable of the noise.
Commissioner McClung asked when the last time a reading of the noise levels had been
done and what were they. Dan Riehle facilities manager for Boston Scientific, responded
he could not tell them exactly what the last readings were, but he believed the readings
were taken in April, 2006 and hc could gct the information to the City.
. Commissioner McClung stated he was supportive of the addition, but he had a concern
regarding the noise issues and how it was affecting the neighborhood.
-- DRAFT --
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - AUGUST 2,2006
DRAFT 6
Commissioner Bezdicek asked what their schedule was for noise level testing. Dan .
Riehle responded thcy did not have a regular testing schedule, but thcy had attempted to
reduce the noise as much as possible.
Judd Brasch noted the noise was inconsistcnt throughout the year depending on the
season.
Commissioner Larson moved, seconded by Commissioner Bezdicek, to approve Planning
Case No. 06-024, Planned Unit Dcvelopment Amendment and Site Plan Review, Boston
Scientific, 4100 Hamline Avenue N, subject to the thirteen conditions as noted in staffs
July 11,2006, report
Commissioner McClung encouraged Boston Scientific to continue to work with thc
residents.
The motion carried unanimously (7-0).
D. PLANNING CASE 06-023: MASTER PLANNED UNlT DEVELOPMENT AND
PRELlMINARY PLAT
Mr. Lehnhoff stated the applicant was rcquesting that the Planning Commission consider .
a Master and Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) and Preliminary Plat proposal to
redevelop the former City Hall and Public Works property into 62,432 squarc feet Thc
office space would separate into 23 units in seven di1ferent buildings. He reviewed the
previous plan and background information. Staff recommended approval of the Mastcr
and Final Planned Unit Development and Preliminary Plat subject to resolving the
Hamline A venuc acccss question and subject to the following conditions:
L Final Plat The applicant shall submit an application for a Final Plat within six (6)
months following City Council approval of the PUD and Preliminary Plat
2. PUD Permit A Planned Unit Development Permit shall be drafted by the City
Attorney and be subject to approval by thc City Council prior to the issuance of a
Building Permit
3. Revised Plans. The applicant shall submit revised plans that are in conformance with
the plan rcvicw comments from the City Engineer Fire Marshal, the Building Official
prior to approving the Final Plat, and any other applicable conditions.
4. Timeline. The applicant's timeline for development shall be as follows:
. Phase I: Fall 2006 - The developer may begin grading, installing utilities, and
construction of storm water improvements.
. Phase 2: Fall/Winter 2006 - The developer may begin construction on units 1
- 9.
. Phase 2: 2008: Project completed.
Extensions beyond December 31, 2008, shall rcquirc an application and be subject to
City Council review and approval. At the time of application for extcnsions, the City .
-- DRAFT --
ARDEN HlLLS PLANNING COMMISSION - AUGUST 2, 2006
DRAFT 7
. Council may include such conditions of approval as they determine necessary for
compliancc with City Code.
5, Bylaws. The bylaws, covenants, deed restrictions, or any other similar documents
shall be subject to review by the City Attorney and shall be submitted prior to filing
the final Plat.
6. Occupancy. No more than one business shall be permitted to occupy anyone office
condominium within the development.
7. Uses. Retail, restaurant, fast-food, and residential uses shall not be permitted to
occupy any of the units in the proposed development. Retail uses may be permitted if
they arc incidental or acccssory to the primary use.
S, Outside Storage. Outside storage shall not be permitted under any circumstances.
9. Landscaping Plan Revisions. The applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan for
review and approval by thc City Planner prior to thc issuancc of building pcrmits that
conforms to the following:
. Additional coniferous trees shall be provided along the west buffer yard of the
development to increase screening for the trail and residential properties.
. At least 30 percent of the trees shall be in the 3.5" to 4" caliper range and 20
percent of the trees are in the 4.5" to 5" caliper range. The number of trees in
the 2" to 3" caliper range shall not be more than 50 percent of the trees in the
landscaping plan.
. The Northwood Red Maple and the Honey Locust to the southeast of unit #16
. shall be supplemented with coniferous trees and/or other vegetation to reduce
headlight glare from southbound traftic.
. The office condominium association shall be responsible for maintaining the
landscaping indefinitely. Diseased or dead landscaping shall be replaced
within six months. Significant changes to the landscaping plan, as determined
by the City Planner, shall require Planning Commission approval.
. The landscaping shall be irrigated.
. The applicant shall be responsible for replacing any damage to the
landscaping on neighboring properties.
10. Landscaping in the Right-of-way. Thc applicant shall be responsible for maintaining
the landscaping in thc Highway 96 right-of-way. Thc City shall be provided with a
copy ofthc letter of permission for the landscaping in the Highway 96 right-of-way.
Ifthc applicant is unable to obtain permission from Ramsey County to landscape a
portion of the Highway 96 right-of~way, the applicant shall submit a revised
landscaping plan that meets the City's landscape plan requirement within the
boundaries of the property_
I I. Landscaping Bond. The applicant shall submit a performance bond or other surety
acceptable to the City Attorney for all landscaping or screening in the amount of 125
percent of the cost of the matcrials and installation. The bond shall be provided prior
to the issuance of any building permits.
12, Screening. 1fthc landscaping docs not providc at least 60 pcrcent coverage as viewed
from neighboring rcsidcntial properties, as dctcrmincd by thc City Planncr, the City
may require additional landscaping.
.
-- DRAFT--
ARDEN lULLS PLANNING COMMISSION - AUGUST 2, 2006
DRAFT 8
13. Dust and Noise. The applicant shall make reasonable efforts to reduce dust and noise .
during construction.
14. Construction Activitics. The applicant shall comply with Section 630.01 of the City
Code limiting construction times to between 7:00 am and 9:00 pm on weekdays and
8:00 am and 9:00 pm on weekends and holidays. However, the City shall reserve the
right to further limit timcs in which construction may occur if a compliant is rcceived
and the complaint is veritled to be a nuisance by the City.
IS. Dumpster Enclosures. The dumpster cnclosurcs shall use Hardie Plank siding that
matchcs the siding of the officc buildings in place of the proposed stucco.
] 6, Trce Preservation. The applicant and their contractors shall work with the City
Planner and City forester to save as many existing, healthy, and well placed trees as
possible in the areas designated as landscape space.
17. Mechanical Screening. All mechanical operating equipment shall be screened to
meet City regulations. Mechanical equipment shall not be visible from the
neighboring residential areas or the daycare.
] 8. Fencing. Decorative fencing shall be erected around the pond at the northeast comer
of the property to increase pedestrian safety. The fence shall require a permit and
shall not exceed six feet in height.
19. Park Dedication, The applicant shall pay a park dedication fee of $40,000.00 prior to
filing the final Plat wilh Ramsey County.
20, Rice Creek Watershed. The applicant shall obtain all necessary permits from the Rice
Creek Watershed District and Ramsey County prior to filing the final Plat.
21.11ighway 96 Access. The Highway 96 access shall be right-in and right-out only. .
The applicant shall be responsible for the signing and striping to provide a right turn
lane on eastbound Highway 96 to the development's driveway.
22. Hamline A venue Access.
. 7he Hamline Avenue access shall permit right-in and right-out access as well
as lefi turns into the access roadfrom northbound traffic on Hamline Avenue,
OR
. The Hamline Avenue access shall be a right-in and right-out access only. No
lefi turns shall be permitted.
. To facilitate movement in and out of the devclopment, a minimum 30-foot
radius shall be built on the northwest and southwest comer of the Hamline
Avenue intcrsection. Revised entrance plans shall be submitted to the City
Engineer and Ramsey County Engineer for approval Plior to approving the
final Plat. The applicant shall be responsible for placing all necessary traffic
slgnage.
23, Daycare Access. The applicant shall provide the daycare with a no-cost access
casement to allow vchicles to access the day care from the office park's access on
Highway 96.
24. Stop Signs. A stop sign shall be placed at thc southbound exit to the access easement
from the daycarc per the recommendation of the 2005 traffic study. A stop sign shall
also be placed at the eastbound exit to the access casement before the daycare
exit/entrance to the access easement per the recommendation of the 2005 traffic
study, .
25. Signs. The following shall apply to all signage in the development:
-- DRAFT --
ARDEN 11lLLS PLANNING COMM1SS10N~AUGUST 2, 2006
DRAFT 9
. . Each unit shall be permitted one 2'xlO' sign on the front ofthe building
centered above the entrance to the unit provided that these signs are uniform
in color and are not illuminated.
. If any units are combined for use by one occupant, the combined units shall be
considered one unit in terms of sign age and shall be permitted one 2'xlO'sign
centered between the combined units provided that the sign is in conformance
with the other primary signs in the development as permitted in condition
20.a.
. Units 1,9,10, and 18 may be permitted one sign facing Highway 96 provided
cach sign docs not cxceed twenty squarc fcet, thc signs are in a uniform
localion on the end units, are uni form in color with other signs in the
development, used by only one occupant, and is not illuminated.
. If units 19-23 are combined into one unit, the combined units may have one
shared sign on the rear of the building provided that the sign is no greater than
60 square feet, is centered on the building, is only used by the single occupant
of the combined units, and is not illuminated.
. Each individual unit or comhined units shall be permitted up to one square
foot of signage for address and business name adjacent to the door. The
address and business name shall be uniform throughout the development in
size, placement, and color. Thcsc signs may be illuminated.
. Each sign shall require a separate penniL
. Ofl~premise advertising shall not be permitted under any circumstances_
. 26. Drainage & Utility EasemenL The applicant shall provide a 12 foot drainage and
utility easement along the exterior lot lines and the right-of-way_
27. Lighting Plan. The applicant shall amend the lighting to be in full compliance with
the City's lighting regulations prior to approving the Final Plat.
28. Sidewalks, The applicant shall submit revised site plans that include sidewalk
connections to each building, wherc feasible, within the development and to the City
and County trail systems. The plan shall be submitted to the City P1anncr and City
Engineer for review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits.
29. TraiL The trail along the western edge of the property shall be conveyed to the City
in a manner that is acceptable to the City Attorney,
30. Easement Vacation. The twenty foot wide pedestrian easement near the center of the
property shall be vacated prior to filing the Final PIaL
3]. Sprinkling. All of the units shall bc sprinkled for fire suppression.
Letterrcccived from Eric Nordeen, Fire Marshal, dated July 21,2006:
. Hydrants need to be within 150 feet of F.D.C.
. F.D.C's nccd to bc located in a visible, conspicuous location. Location will be
consistent on each building preferably the center unit, front side of each building.
. No Parking Fire Lanes will be needed 10 feet both sides from ccntcr of hydrants.
. Will bc ficld assigned.
-- DRAFT --
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - AUGUST 2, 2006
DRAFT 10
. No parking signs needed on one side of entrance road from Hamline, curve north .
of building 18, and access road north of building 9 and 10.
. Only one fire department key box needed per building. To be placed near F.D.C.
Memorandum from Dan Soler, Ramscy County Public Works, dated July 27, 2006:
"TIle Ramsey County Public Works Department has reviewed thc rcvised site plan for the
Arden Hills Office Park. The County prcviously provided comments to the City
regarding the dcvelopment of this property on May 2 and May 20, 2005. Ramsey County
has thc following comments regarding this development.
L The previously proposed development for this site included 76,000 square feet of
office condominiums. Thc new proposal is for 62,000 square feet of officc
condominiums. The County expects the anticipated trip generation for this site to be
proportionately less than the 868 trips per day cstimatcd in the previous proposal.
2. Access to the site from the right-inlright-oul driveway on Highway 96 will operate
adequatcly. The County will require the developer to sign and mark the right turn
lane from westbound Highway 96 into the site.
3, The proposed access on Hamline A venue will be located at thc existing access to the
daycare and the daycare driveway connectcd into this new entrance road. Left turns
exi sting onto Hamline Avenuc III the p.m. peak hour will be problematic.
Northbound Hamline A venue traffic frequently backs up past this entrance. This will .
result in dclay for vehicles exiting the site onto Hamline Avenue. The City may wish
to restrict left turns out of the development at the Ham1ine A venue cntrancc. This
will rcquire drivers wishing to Iravel west on Highway 96 to turn right out of the
Highway 96 access and make a U-turn at Hamline Avenue. This should not be a
prob1enl on a protectcd left turn phase, The right turn in, right turn out and left turn in
at the Hamline Avcnue access point are not anticipated to be a problem.
4. The County will require adequate radius points on the Hamline A venue access to
allow right turns in and out of the driveway. The radii should be 25 to 30 feet.
5. The developer will be required to obtain a permit from Ramsey County for work
within the right-of-way. This includes both access points and utility connections.
Thanks for thc opportunity to make comments regarding this issue. If you have any
questions or need any additional information please give me a call at 266-7114."
Chair Sand asked if a second traffic study had been done. Mr. Lehnhoff stated a second
traffic study had bcen prepared. He stated he spoke with the consultant who prepared thc
previous traffic study, and they indicated that the results from the 2005 traffic study
should still be valid.
Commissioncr Bezdicck asked if they had a traffic count that they had going into the
daycare ccntcr. Mr. Lehnhoff responded that might have been in thc original traffic
count, but hc did not have that information separated out.
.
-- DRAFT --
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION ~ AUGUST 2, 2006
DRAFT 11
. Commissioner Thompson asked if the daycare center had made any comments_ Mr.
Lehnhoff responded they had been invited to the community meeting, but he had not
heard any comments from them.
Chair Sand asked how many community meetings had been held_ Mr. Lehnhoff
responded thcrc was one community meeting held on July 26'\ 2006, at City llalL
Chair Sand opened the public healing at 8:07 p.m.
Chair Sand invited anyone for or against the request to come forward and make
comment
Jim Bharma, 4540 Keilhson Drive, stated thc project backed up into his back yard. He
stated he had lived in his home since 1990 and when he bought his housc this land was
owned by thc City. He stated he would now have buildings facing his back yard and
asked how his property value would be affected. He indicated he was paying property
taxes on a value of S460,000 and he believed his property values would go down. He
noted thcrc was also an access onto Highway 96 from Keithson. He stated they had to
wait a long time to take a left He stated there was a bad traffic problem in his area. He
noted with the addition of 250 parking spots, this would be "a travesty." He cxprcsscd
concern that the building was too close to his property and with the building being two
stOJies, in the winter his privacy would be gone because they would be looking into his
. backyard. He askcd if the officc complex would be open on the weekends. He stated this
project was rcjccted oncc beforc and all thcy did was to "recycle the project." He
believcd the City and thc County should protcct the rights of the homeowners in the area.
He believed in democracy, but he felt this was infiinging on his rights as a long-term
citizcn. He asked them to think about all of thc aspects on how this would affect the
homeowners and townhome owners in the area.
Elwood Caldwell, 1451 Arden View Drive, read the following statement from the Board
of Directors of Arden Hills North Homes Association: "Members of Arden Hills North
Homes Association are the owners and with one or two exceptions residents of the 140
townhomes locatcd immcdiately adjacent to and south of the property proposed for
development, with addresses of 1342 -- 1481 Arden Vicw Drive. Its governing body is a
nine-member elected Board of DirectoTS. The (ollowing statements reprcscnt thc vicw of
that Board,
As pointed out in the past we are not now and never have been opposed to developmcnt
of the subject property as a townhouse-type office park per se. Our opposition to the
predecessor proposal finally denied by the City Council on July 18, 2005, concerned
primarily matters of density, usage, setbacks, parking, and landscape space. Some but
not all of those concerns were alleviated during the July 18, 2005, Council meeting and
others have been alleviated in the proposal now presented as planning case 06-023.
. However, a majQIf9_nC.e!1.Ln95"js that all ofthc conditions added to the previous proposal
by the sJafI.9Lthc Planning CommissiQ.ll via Resolution 05-45 as presented (or as
-- DRAFT --
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - AUGUST 2, 2006
DRAFT 12
ams;ndcd bv the Council) be rctained wherever applicable to the revised development .
proposal, notwithstandinLdcfeat of Resolution 05-45 bv a 3-2 maioritv in favor.
Accordingly, our analysis at this time will deal with Conditions 3-6, 9, and 17 that were
included in Rcsolution 05-45, now replaced in the Staff recommendation on Planning
Case 06-23 by Conditions 6,7,22,24, and 25.
Occupancv and Use.
Conditions 6 and 7 deal with occupancy and use of each of the 23 units now proposed.
Not more than one business shall be permitted to occupy anyone office condominium
unit within the developmcnt, nor shall retail, restaurant, fast-food or residential uses be
permitted, except retail use if incidental or accessory to the primary office use. We
previously advocated such reslrictions and continue to do so, including their achievement
through deed restrictions, covenants, or bylaw requirements.
lJamline Avenuc Access,
Resolution 05-45 defeated last year (by a Council votc of 3-2 in favor) included no
Hamlinc A venue access, this having been deleted by an amendment adopted 4- I earlier in
the meeting. This is still what we would prefer. However, if Hamline Avenue access is
to be provided, we support the Staff recommended Conditions 24 and 26 in their entirety,
including right-in and right-out access 9nly_wi!h_no 1efUyms, with minimum 30-foot
radii on thc northwest and southwcst comers, and with appropriate signs placed prior to
the road to the office developmcnt being opened up. .
Siena2c.
The wording on this subject presented to the Council last year allowed for one
freestanding monument sign at the Highway 96 entrance, with each unit to have fifteen
(15) square feet of signage including a 1 square foot address and name plaque adjacent to
the main entry for the unit. End units corresponding to units I, 9, 10 and 18 in the currcnt
proposed development could have a total of thirty (30) square feet of signagc but no more
than fifteen (15) square feet to the north (facing Highway 96) and no more than fIfteen
(15) square feet at the front of the units.
However, after several councilmembers expressed dissatisfaction with this, the wording
about individual units was amended unanimously to state "that the signage does not
exceed 2 x 2 and this [to] come back to the Council for final approvaL" There was no
mention in the resolution as amended of any variance for the units now numbered 1,9,10
and 18, nor any discussion whatsoever by the Council of a large sign facing Highway 96
on lhe north wall of units 19-23. Mr. Ebensteiner is quoted in the Council minutes as
stating he decided to go along with 2 x 2 signs outside the doors.
III vicw of all this, we strongly urge that apparent Council intent to allow each unit only 4
square feet of signage be retained in place of the 20 square feet stated in the first two
bullct-point paragraphs ofthc Staff recommendation condition 25, and that the third and
fourth bullet-point paragraphs rcgarding additional signage for units], 9, 10 and 18 and
for units 19-23 be struck out. We support the intent of the final three bullet-point .
paragraphs in recommended Condition 25.
-- DRAFT --
ARDEN HlLLS PLANNING COMMISSION - AUGUST 2, 2006
DRAFT 13
. In summary, we respectfully request that if you approve the requested Master and final
PUD and Preliminary Plat proposal including llamline Avenue access, you do so only
after adopting the Starr recommended Conditions 6 and 7 on occupancy and usc,
Conditions 24 and 26 on access with Right-in and Right-out only, and Condition 25 on
signage amended as we have advocated above."
Stanley Harpstead, 1277 Nursery Hill Lane, statcd he was concerned about the traffic
conditions on Hamline and the completion of Lexington A venue had not diminished any
traffic on Hamline. He believed the major issue was traffic on Hamline and he did not
believe this project could support the density being proposed. He noted adding more
inlets and outlets was not going to make this any easier. He stated the best solution was
to lower the density, which would reduce the traffic. He requested the Commission reject
this development and instead look at a development of 40,000 square feet. He stated a
better proposal was to split the development so that the eastern part of the parcel was
retained for future development and the developer work with the western parcel only.
Diane Phillipi, 1442 Arden View Drive, stated she was a 30 year resident. She proposed
during construction that all construction vehicles have to use Highway 96 and not
Hamline Avenue. Shc noted thc noise factor for the daycare center and the townhomes
would be a factor. She bclieved it would be safer and less noisey if they used Highway
96 and not Hamline Avenue as their entrance and exit.
. Richard Roessler, 1261 Nursery Hill Lane, stated he agreed with Mr. Harpstead's
comments. He asked why they could not convert this development into a residential area.
He noted with the expansion of Boston Scientific and the' COlmty development across
Highway 96, it had substantially increased the traffic on Hamline Avenue. He stated this
was no longer a positive thing. He was not sure the developer had the community in
mind when doing this. Hc stated he was a believer in impact statements and
recommcnded they look at this and not approve it now, but rather make it more
community minded and do it in such a way as to "test the system." He recommended an
impact statement be done.
Cindy Owen, 4490 Hamline Avenue, stated she had a coneem about the size of the
property and traffic flow. She asked if anyone had looked at how many residents were
impacted on the cast side of Hamline with respect to access. She noted right now their
main congestion was rush hour and if they put in this development, she believed they
would have traffic issues all day long. She believed there would be no down time on
llamline A venue. She asked if they could look at the development being reduced down
to 40,000 square feet. She believed lhe development was too large. She noted Boston
Scientific would be adding onto their buildings and the development of TCAAP, would
also put additional traffic onto Hamline A venue. She stated there were a lot of questions
the residents had and they did not feel they had answers to.
. Brian Densmore, 4504 Hamline Avenue North, stated if the Commissioners lived on
Hamline Avenue they would feel the same way about this development as the residents
-- DRAFT --
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 2, 2006
DRAFT ]4
did. He stated he was concemed about the increase in traffic and his neighborhood. He .
noted he could not allow his grandchildren in his front yard because of all of the traffic
and this concemed him. He believed this development would add to the traffic problems
they already had, He noted the average person going down Hamline was going 50-60
mph. He indicated on average, he had an accident in the front of his home onee a day.
He believed Boston Scientifie would also add to the traffic.
Mike Giel, 4534 Keithson Drive, stated there was no workable way the roads could
handle the type of traffIe this development would create_ He stated the intersection was
not made to handle this large of a development. He noted if people were coming from
the east, they would need to do a U-tum to get into the development while crossing two
lanes of traffic. He noted people on Keithson Drive could not see the traffie because it
was below the hill. He stated this would be a problem for anyone driving down Highway
96 and Hamline Avenue also. He noted in the wintertime he believed there would be a
lot of problems. 1 Ie expressed concern about the cut out on Highway 96 off of Keithson
was not sufficient either. He did not believe either one of the roads could to1eratc this
type of a dcvelopment. He noted this was a safety issue.
Chair Sand recessed the meeling at 8:36 p,m. and reconvened the meeting at 8:43 p.m.
Larry Stark, 1460 Arden View Drive, presented and explained photographs he had taken
regarding the tral1ic issues. He stated it was frustrating to come here and bc given three
minutes, and not know what the current plan was. lIe believed thcre should have been .
more than one community meeting regarding this project. Hc stated given the TCAAP
development and the modifications to the Hamlinc Avenue intersection and the
expansion of Boston Scientific and Medtronic facilitics, he asked why they have not
considered doing an AUAR, He stated they should not look at this small square of
propcrty and believe everything would work fine, but look at the community as a whole_
Brigid Shields, 4365 Arden View Court, stated cars exiting right on Hamline Avenue in
the evening will have to drive south to County Road F over to Lexington Avenue, north
on Lexington Avenue and back on Highway 96 to get back to where they were already.
He indicated this was a waste of time and money and it did not make sense. He believed
there would be a dangcr point with the daycare center also. He stated his only
opportunity to get on Hamline A venue was whcn traffic was stopped on Highway 96, but
if traffic was not stopped at Highway 96, they would be trapped in their own homes,
Tawana Holtz, ] 371 Arden View Drive, stated she has been a resident for over two years.
Shc noted she was an cmployee of Boston Scientific and in the past couple of years, she
has been late to work due to the traffic and she only had to go six blocks. She asked if
the development could be moved to the north side of Highway 96, which she believed
could handle the traffic better. She stated putting in a large commercial development
right next to an existing residential development would bc like living in downtown St.
Paul.
.
-- DRAFT --
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - AUGUST 2, 2006
DRAFT 15
. Gail Van Buskirk, 1390 Arden View Drive, stated her petition had 268 signatures and
when she walked around and spoke with the residents they were angry because the
developer had not listened to them and had not addressed the major issues, such as traffic,
access on Hamline A venue, reduction of property values, ete. She stated the
neighborhood wanted something better and no solutions had been presented. She stated
the Commissioners were probably eon fused because what they were hearing from the
residents and what they saw from the traffic study were in contradiction. She stated whcn
thcy looked at the data from the traffic study, they found the traffic going eastbound there
was a 48 second delay, which would go up to 51 seconds by 2007 without the
development bcing built, but if the development was built the delay would be 132
seconds, She stated they had to look at the data and note the delay times significantly
incrcased with this development. She proposcd to cut offthc Hamline Avenue exit and
take out all of the asphalt as we!l as flipping the first building and moving the parking lot
up. She proposed pUlling in an exit on Highway 96 so they had an exit coming into
Highway 96 and going out on to llighway 96. He recommended they put a signal at
Keithson for a protected U-turn. Shc stated 268 residents could not be wrong. She urged
them to deny the PUD and incorporate the solutions she presented in this development.
Pam Hanson, 4367 Arden View Court, stated she was opposed to the development. She
recommcnded the f()!lowing changes to the conditions:
9. Landscape Plan Revisions changc to: Additional coniferous trees (at least 8 trees)
. shall be provided along the west buffer yard of the development to increase screening
for the trail and residential properties.
Change the above condition to:
. Additional coniferous trees (at least 8 trees) shall be provided along the west
buffer yard of the development to increase screening for the trail and
residential properties. Additional coniferous trees shaU be added to the south
border (at least 10 trees) and east border (at least 5 trees) to increase
screening/or the townhouses and day care.
Current:
. TIle applicant shall be responsible for replacing any damage to the
landscaping on neighboring propcrties.
Change the above condition to:
. The applicant shall be responsible for replacing any damage to the
landscaping on neighboring properties. Replaced trees will be either 6/00t
minimum coniFerous trees or 3 inch caliper deciduous trees, depending on the
type of tree damaged. This guarantee will be/or five years after the initiation
of the development, Damage to landscaping and trees will be completed
within six months after damage.
. 12. S.cTeening
-- DRAFT --
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - AUGUST 2, 2006
DRAFT 16
CWTent: .
. If the landscaping does not provide at least 60 perccnt coverage as viewed
from neighboring residential properties, as determined by the City Planner, the
City may require additional landscaping.
Change the above condition to:
. If the landscaping does not provide at least 60 percent coverage as viewed
from neighboring residential properties, as determined by the City Planner, the
City will require additional landscaping_ The time periods and frequency of
these determinations shall be one month afier landscaping is completed for
each phase a/the development.
] 6. Tree Preservation
Current:
. The applicant and their contractors shall work with the City Planner and City
Forester to save as many existing, hcalthy, and well placed trees as possible in
the arcas designated as landscape space.
Change the above condition to:
. The applicant and their contractors shall work with the City Planner and City
Forester to savc as many existing, healthy, and wcll placed trees as possible in
the areas dcsignated as landscape space. If any of the 10 existing trees that .
are proposed to be preserved are unable to be preserved, then the equivalent
caliper inches of appropriate trees will be planted to attain the total caliper
inch requirement 0/275.5.
22. Hamlinc Avenue Access
Changc conditions to:
. Hamline A venue access will not be allowed_
L Parking Spaces
Add condition 32 and the following:
. Reduce numher of parking spaces from 250 to 200.
Dave Ehrsman, President of Arden Hills North Homes Association, stated the devcloper
had agreed to drop the Hamline A venue access, reduce the signage and increase the
landscaping. He stated they were literally trapped and the only place to get out was to go
southbound on Hamline A vcnue. He believed the traffic study was a sham.
Chair Sand closed the public hearing at 9: 14 p.m,
Dan Soler, Ramsey County Public Works Traffic Engineer, stated people were correct .
that this development was on two high volume County roads. He noted since the
-- DRAFT --
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - AUGUST 2, 2006
DRAFT 17
. reconstruction there was limited acccss on Highway 96. He indicated Ham1ine Avenue
also had high volume with a lot of driveways and City streets on it. He stated the City
needed to determine if they felt comfortable how they were going to allow access into
imd out of the site. He stated the County was comfortable with the right-in and right-out
access as well as 1cft turn-in and left turn-out. He stated the lIamline Avenue access
could have any number of different accesses and it became a matter of what the City felt
comfortable with.
Commissioner Larson asked if the traffic engineering finn was reliable. Mr. Soler stated
as far as he knew, they were a reliable firm and hc did not see anything done within the
study that would try and hide or fool anyone. He noted traffic studies when it pertained
to developments made a lot of assumptions and level of service was an "out there"
concept. Hc statcd they had to look at this from a morc holistic way and they would look
at thc impacts to the County roads if they allowed a certain access or configuration.
Commissioner Zimmerman asked how many trips were eastbound on Highway 96 on a
daily basis, Mr. Soler respondcd thc traffic on Highway 96 was about 50/50. He noted
the difference was that during di fferent timcs of day that could fluctuate greatly. He
statcd it was over 10,000 a day on eastbound Highway 96.
Commissioner Zimmennan asked what the traffic count was on Hamline on a daily basis.
Mr. Soler responded he did not have the specific answer, but he believed it was over
. 10,000, 1 Ie stated they should rcfcr to thc traffic study for this information.
Commissioner Zimmerman staled the study show cd 434 cars in and 434 cars out of this
development, which would total 868 trips. Mr. Soler statcd the County would try to
makc the roadways operate with whatever development the City chosc to put in.
Chair Sand stated they could not mathematically predict, but they could assume the U-
turn at Keithson. He asked if they could put a no U-turn sign on Highway 96 at Keithson.
Mr. Soler stated he was not aware there were any problems with U-turns at Keithson. He
noted no U-turns were difficult to enforce and if there would be a problem with U-turns
they would enforcc no U-turns. He indicatcd if there were no access at Hamline, they
would anticipate a lot of U-turns at Keithson. He noted a signal at Keithson would be
good and bad. It would allow easier access, but it would also add to the potcntia1 of more
accidents on Highway 96. He stated they would need to determine if it was safer to add
another red light on Highway 96 or if it was safer to allow U-turns. He stated hc had not
considered the possibility of adding a signal at Keithson until tonight's meeting. He
noted they were anticipating a signal at the TCAAP entrance in the future.
Chair Sand stated many comments were made tonight of the bottle effect at southbound
Ham1ine A venue. He asked if Hamline Avenue would be two lanes southbound from
Highway 96 to County Road F at some point in the future. Mr. Soler responded that was
not an easily answered qucstion, He stated they did not know what the configuration was
. going to be south at Interstate 694 and Hamline Avenue. lIe stated there was the
potential of not having an access on or ofT lnterstate 694 in the future, so that might
-- DRAFT --
-----------
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - AUGUST 2, 2006
DRAFT 18
change the need for that ever needing to be a two 1anc road into the future. He noted .
therc would continue to be traffic on Hamline Avenue, even if they could not access
Interstate 694.
Commissioner Modesette stated she was pleascd they were willing to work with the City
to accommodate any concerns regarding safety. She asked at what point the pressure
would be identified on Hamline Avenue. She asked if they would be willing to enter a
signal at Keithson in order to allow safer turns on Highway 96, or could they expedite thc
light at North Heights Church. Mr. Soler cxplained the formulas they looked at when
thcy were considering a signal at an intersection. He stated it would be up to the City if
felt they wanted to initiate a signal at North lIeights Church. He stated there was nothing
traffic wise at that location to generate the nccd for a traffic signal.
Commissioner Bezdicek noted there have been many comments about the hazard at
Keithson. He asked if there was cause to put a median through there and construct the
stop light down at North Heights Church. Mr. Soler statcd no 1cft turn at non-signalized
areas would be safer, but he indicatcd that would also change the traffic flows. He stated
he was not aware that the Kcithson intersection was a dangerous intersection and they
were not proposing to change that intersection.
Commissioner Bezdicek asked if thc County would cntertain another curb-cut on
Highway 96. Mr. Soler responded the County would not entertain another curb-cut on
Highway 96. He indicated this would be another unsignalized point and he did not .
belicve this would be any safcr.
Commissioner McClwlg recommended the following amendments to staff s conditions:
Amendment #1: condition 5: Amend to read: The bylaws, covenants, deed restrictions,
or any similar documents shall include all of the restrictions included in the approved
Planned Unit Development These documents shall be subject to review by the City
Attorney and shall be submitted prior to filing the Final Plat.
Amendment #2: Condition 25: Strike all aner "lhe loll owing shall apply to all signage in
the development:" and inelude:
Bullet Point 1: "Onc monument sign that does not exceed the sign requirements
of the Neighborhood Business Zone shall be permitted at thc Highway 96
entrance to the propcrty."
Bullet Point 2: "Signage shall be Iimitcd to four squarc foot signs adjacent to the
entrance of each unit, including a onc-foot squarc address nameplate, and there be
no other signs applied to the cxterior of the buildings."
Amendment 113: Condition 1132 "Gutlers and Downspouts. Gutters and downspouts shall
be added to all buildings in the development to carry stonn water directly to the storm
water system without drainagc over land." .
-- DRAFT --
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - AUGUST 2, 2006
DRAFT 19
. Amendmcnt #4: Condition #33 "Sidewalk Cushion. A one-foot cushion bc added under
any sidewalk provided in the development."
Amendment #5: Condition ti22: Strikc bullct point number I.
Amendment #6: Condition #34 "Parking. The equivalent of 35 parking spaces shall be
removed from the parking plan as proposed to be replaced by landscaping with trees
subject to approval during final plat rcview." (This will provide 9.35 spaces per unit)
Chair Sand asked on recommended Amendment #2 regarding sJgnage why
Commissioner McClung was restricting this signage. Commissioner McClung responded
at the July, 2005 Council meeting, this was a concern of Council and hc wanted to
addrcss that concern,
Commissioner Modesette statcd shc hesitatcd to add amendment #3 because drainage
over land actually rcduced flooding and without analysis from thc City Enginccr, shc
believcd they might be setting up a problem they intended to mitigate. Commissioner
McClung noted his intent was to duplicate City Council on that condition.
Commissioner Modesette statcd on the signagc issue she believed at some point in a
development, signage was key to the success of thc business and succcss of a business
was viable to a dcvcJopment and she believed at some point they could be pushingtoo far
. by not allowing a business (0 be successfuL
Commissioner Larson stated he was opposed to Conditions 2, 3, and 6. He believed the
signage should be as allowed for the underlying zoning in that district and he saw no
reason why it should be different. He agreed that the drainage on the site had been
engineered and he did not believe that it was their job to do that. With respect to parking,
he did not see how they could cJiminatc the parking spaces without showing good reason
for doing so.
Commissioner Zimmcrman noted amendment 5 will also impact the daycarc centcr if
they e1iminatcd the turn.
Chair Sand noted the Commission was a recommending body only and the CounciJ could
chose to follow their recommendation or not follow their recommendation. He stated
Council had the final decision.
Mr. Lehnhoff stated with amendment numbcr two, they had a right to a monument sign
and noted they did allow multi-tenant signs as a part of the monument sign. He asked if
this should be rcstrictcd. He stated as i( was the applicant was only proposing a building
sign with no listing of each tenant, but it could be a multi-tcnant sign in the futurc.
Commissioncr Bczdicck recommended they vote on each amcndment scparatcJy.
.
-- DRAFT --
__n_________
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - AUGUST 2, 2006
DRAFT 20
Commissioner Thompson moved, seconded by Commissioner Larson, to, approve .
Planning Case No, 06-023, Master Planned Unit Development & Prcliminary Plat; Royal
Oaks Realty, Jnc., 1440 - 1450 West Highway 96, subject to the thirty-one conditions as
noted in staffs February 27, 2003, report.
Commissioner McClung moved, seconded by Commissioner Larson, to approve
amendment to condition number 5 to rcad: Thc bylaws, covenants, deed restrictions, or
any similar documents shall include all of the restrictions including in the approved
Planncd Unit Development. These documents shall be subject to review by the City
Attorney and shall be submitted prior to filing the Final Plan.
The motion carried unanimously (7-0).
Commissioner McClung moved to approve Amendment #2: Condition 25: Strike all
after "the following shall apply to all signage in the development:" and include:
Bullet Point 1: "Onc monument sign that does not exceed the sign requirements
of the Neighborhood Business Zone shall be permitted at the Highway 96
entrance to thc property."
Bullet Point 2: "Signage shall be limited to four square toot signs adjacent to the
entrance of each unit, including a one-toot square address nameplate, and there be
no other signs applied to the exterior of the buildings." Motion failed for lack of a .
second.
Motion failed for lack or a second.
Commissioner McClung moved to approve Amendment 112: Condition number 32:
"Gutters. Gutters shall be added to all buildings in the development to carry storm water
directly to the storm water system without drainage over land".
Motion failed for lack of a second.
Commissioner McClung moved, seconded by Commissioner Larson, to approve
amendment #4: Condition #32 "Sidewalk Cushion. A one-foot cushion be added under
any sidewalk provided in the development"
Motion carried (6- I Modesette opposed).
Commissioncr McClung moved, seconded by Commissioner Thompson, to approve
amendment #5: Condition #22 Strike bullet point number 1.
Motion carried 4-3. (Commissioners Zimmennan, Modesette, Chair Sand opposed).
Commissioner McClung moved, seconded by Commissioner Modesette, to approve
amendment #6: Condition #33, Parking, The equivalent of 35 parking spaces shall be .
-- DRAFT --
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - AUGUST 2, 2006
DRAFT 21
. removed from the parking plan as proposed to be replaced by landscaping with trees
subject to approval during final plat review.
Motion failed 3-4 (Commissioners Thompson, Larson, Zimmerman, and Bezdicek
opposed)_
Original motion as amended carried 6- J (Commissioner McClung opposed).
Motion by Larson, seconded by Zimmerman to extend the meeting past 10:00 p.m.
Motion carried unanimously (7-0).
UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS
A. Verbal Update on Zoning Code
Mr. Lehnhoff updated the Council on the Zoning Code update.
B. Blue Cross/Blue Shield Grant
Mr. Lehnhoff updated the Commissioners on the award of the Blue Cross/Blue Shield
Grant.
. C. Minor SlIbdivisionlVariance Proposal
Mr. Lehnhoff stated he had received a phone call from a resident who wanted to
subdivide his property. He noted the resident wanted to talk to the Commissioners to see
if there was any interest in this proposal before he submitted an application.
Cal Anderson, 3424 Snail Lake Boulevard, stated he was looking at purchasing a
property on the north side of Lake Josephine. He indicated he was proposing a flag lot
with a house on Ingerson. He asked if this would be acceptable. Mr. Lehnhotfnoted this
would require a variance and explained why a variance would be required.
Commissioner Larson stated he did not look favorably on flag lots, even though there
were other flag lots in the area.
Commissioner McClung stated he was not in favor of a flag lot.
Chair Sand stated it appeared if the requirement was 95 teet and he had 100 feet, it
sounded like it would meet the current zoning requirement, but he did not believe the
Commission would be inclined to approve this.
D. New City Website: http://www.ci.arden-hills.IDn.us
.
-- DRAFT --
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 2, 2006
DRAFT 22
REPORTS .
A. Planning Commissioners
None.
B. Staff
None.
C. Council Member
Ms. Barton updated the Commission on recent City Council actions,
ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Larson moved, seconded by Commissioner Bezdicek to adjourn the
meeting at 10: 15 p.m. The motion carried unanimously (7 -0).
.
.
-- DRAFT --
~
. ~HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 29, 2006 PC Agenda Item 3.A
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: James Lehnhoff, City Plann#
SUBJECT: PC #: 06-025
Site Plan Review
AMT Inc.
1300 Grey Fox Road
Requested Action
The applicant has requested a site plan review to add 36 parking stalls to the property at 1300
Grcy Fox Road.
. Back2round
1. Overview of Request:
AMT Inc. is requesting a site plan review to add 36 parking stalls to the property at 1300
Grey Fox Road. Although AMT Inc. owns the building, J.J. Taylor Distributing, which was
formerly known as East Side Beverage, is the tenant. J J. Taylor Distributing also occupies
the building at 1260 Grey Fox Road, which is immediately east of the 1300 Grey Fox Road
property.
Grey Fox Road was recently reconstructed, and all on-street parking was eliminated. Prior to
the reconstruction, J.J. Taylor Distributing had been using Grey Fox Road for a portion of
their parking needs. With the loss of the on-street parking, J.J. Taylor Distributing has been
short on parking and had very crowded parking lots, This request is meant to provide
adequate parking for all employees and visitors on the property.
The Zoning Ordinance requires a site plan review for new construction, modification of an
existing building's exterior, or modification of a site in the I-Flex Zone. The applicant is
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for September 6. 2006
. IIMetro-inet.us',ardenhills"IPlnnningIPlanning Cases\2006\06-015 AMT Inc JJ Taylor Site Plnn Review fPENDING) \083006 PC report -AMI"
lnc Site Plan Review_doc Page 1 of8
proposing to increase the number of parking spaces at 1300 Grey Fox Road by 36 from the
current 31 stalls for a total of 67 stalls, The existing parking area will be re-striped to .
accommodate a thirteen ofthe new stalls, and twenty-three new stalls will be created by
removing the grassy peninsula in the parking area.
Although the submitted plans indicate that there will be 69 stalls on the site with the
expansion, the applicant has opted to not include two proposed stalls in the northeastern part
of the property due, in part, to a potential encroachment on the 20 foot parking setback from
the front lot line (Attachment 3A-4).
Currently, JJ. Taylor Distributing is sharing parking between the two properties that it is
leasing. In terms of use, the two properties are used as one. The 1260 Grey Fox Road
property has 87 parking stalls. With the requested sitc plan review, there would be 154
parking stalls between the two properties for the 140 employees at the two sites. The
applicant has submitted a shared parking agreement between the owners of 1300 Grey Fox,
1260 Grey Fox, and JJ. Taylor Distributing.
Thcre were three previous planning cases for this property; however, those previous planning
cases do not affect this planning case.
2. Surrounding Area:
N ortb Industrial I-Flex Office/W arehouse .
South Railroad -- Railroad
-..--
East Industrial I-Flex OfficelWarehouse
West Highway 511Hamline Ave -- Highway 5 I !Hamline Ave
3. Site Data:
Industrial
Office/warehousing
i-Flex
6,64 acres (289,238 square feet)
The property is generally flat with some minor rolling areas.
City of Arden Hilts
Planning Commission Meetingfor September 6,2006
I\Melro-inet.u5Iardenhills\PlanningIPlanning Cases\2006\06-025 AMT fne - JJ Taylor Site Pinn Review (PENDfNG)W83006 PC reporl- AMT .
fne Site Plan Revie,\'.doc
Page 2 of 8
Plan Evaluation: Ordinances
. 1. Zouing Ordinance (Scction 5.F)
The existing use is a legal use within the I-Flex Zone. The existing land coverage does
conform to the limits ofthe I-Flex Zone. The proposal is also in conformance with the
requirements of the I-Flex Zone.
Site Conditions
I-Flex
Maximum Existing Proposed
Site Area (sq, ft,) 289,238 289,238 289,238
Buildino Coveraoe (so, ft,) 115,695 81,046 81,046
Building Coverage 40% 28.0% 28.0%
Parkina/Sidewalk CoveraQe {so. ft.\ 52,677 59,657
Totallmoervious (sa. tu 216.929 133,723 140,703
T otallmpervious 75%, 46.2% 48.6%
There a proposed 6,980 square foot . .. . surface with this
IS mcrease III ImpervIOUS
application.
2. Applicable Parking Regulations (Section 6.F.1 of the Zouing Ordinance)
A. Area and Dimensions of Each Parking Space - Section 6.F .1.a
. Regulations: A parking space shall be not less than three hundred (300) square feet per
vehicle of standing and maneuvering area. Individual spaces shall be at least nine (9) feet
in width and eighteen (18) feet in length.
Proposal: The proposal meets the area and dimension requirements for the parking
spaces.
B. Proximity to Main Entrance - Section 6.f l.d.(3)
Regulation: Spaces required for business and industrial uses should be within eight
hundred (800) feet of the main entrance to the principal building served.
Proposal: All parking spaces are within 800 feet ofthe main entrance to the principal
building,
C. Front Lot Line Parking Lot Setbacks - Section 6.F.1.d.(4)
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meetingfor September 6,2006
. lIMerru-inet.lIs'LardenhillsIPlalllfingIPlrmning Cases12006\06-025 AMT file JJ Taylor Site Plan Review (PE1VDfNG/I083006 _ PC reporl- A/lIT
Ine Site Plan Review.doc Page 3 of8
Regulation: No off-street parking space, with the exception of the driveways, shall be
within twenty (20) feet of the right-of-way line of any public street, except in the GB .
District where the setback shall be fifty (50) feet.
Proposal: Since the applicant has removed two proposed parking stalls in the
northeastern part of the property, the proposal meets the 20 foot front lot line setback
requirement.
D, Side and Rear Parking Lot Setbacks - Section 6.F.1.d.(5)
Regulation: In no case shall off-street parking areas containing four (4) or more parking
spaces be closer than five (5) feet from any side or rear lot lines, except in the GB District
where no such parking shall be closer than 20 feet to any exterior project lot lines other
than for joint facilities as permitted herein, or as otherwise permitted in this ordinance.
Proposal: The existing and proposed parking spaces are at least five feet from the side
and rear lot lines,
E, Off-Street Parking Spaces Required - Section 6.F.l.j
Regulation: Other Business and Industry - 1 for each cmployee on major shift plus 1 for
each vehicle used in conducting the business or 1 for each 1,000 sq. ft. of noor area,
whichever is greater.
Proposal: There are approximately 140 employees at J,1. Taylor Distributing, though .
presumably not all of the workers are on the same shift, The existing building has 81,046
square feet of space, which means that at least 81 parking spaces are required to be in full
conformance with the Zoning Ordinance; however, if more than 81 people are any major
shift then more parking would be required.
The 1300 Grey Fox Road property currently has 31 usable stalls and the 1260 Grey Fox
Road property has 87 stalls for a total of 118 parking stalls. With this application, the
total number of parking spaces would increase by 36 to 154 spaces. According to the
applicant, 152 spaces between the two properties are sufficient to accommodate each
shift.
Should additional parking be needed, thcre is ample space on the 1300 Grey Fox Road
property that could be converted to parking. In the I-Flex Zone, up to 75 percent of the
lot can be covered with impervious surfaces. With this plan, only 48.6 percent of the lot
will be covered by impervious surface, Approximately 76,000 square feet of space is
available for additional parking, which could accommodate up to 253 parking spaces
depending on site conditions.
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meetingfor September 6, 2006
I\Afet/'O-inerus\anlenhillsiPlanl1ing'Planlling Case~;'120061,()6-025 AMT fne -J./ Taylor Sire Plan Review (PENDING)1,083006 PC report - AMT .
fne Sile Plan Review.doc Page 4 of8
-------
Thc City's parking regulations do provide for shared parking as long as there is an
agrcement between the owners of the two properties. The applicant has submitted a
. signed agreement between thc two properties for sharcd parking that will last through
March 31, 2010, which is whcn the current building leasc expires, According to a letter
submilted by the owners of 1260 Grey Fox Road, the two propcrtics havc been sharing
parking for more than twenty years,
F. ADA Parking Requirements-
Although the City does not have specific American with Disabilities Act (ADA)
requirements in the Ordinances, the applicant is required to meet ADA regulations. For
the 67 stalls on the site, at least three of the stalls must be ADA accessible from the main
entrance. It appears that there are two ADA stalls currently on the sitc; however, the
proposal indicates that there would only be one ADA parking stall, To make the single
ADA parking stall shown on the site plan fully accessible from the main entrance, there
must be a curb cut and a maximum slope of I to 20 along the sidewalk to the main
entrance.
Two additional ADA parking stalls must be provided to be in compliance with ADA
regulations. The Building Official would need to review the locations and accessibility
for the two stalls to ensure that they are in compliance with ADA regulations.
G, Drainage
. The City Engineer has reviewed the proposal and her comments are attached
(Attachmcnt 3A-2), Upon reviewing the proposal, the City Engineer has determincd that
the regional drainage pond for the Grey Fox Road area is adequately sized to
accommodate the small increase in runoff from the additional impervious surface.
3. Special Use Permit - Section 8.D.3.b
Section 8,D.3.b of the Arden Hills Zoning Ordinance lists the criteria for evaluating a Special
Use Permit, which is also used for site plan reviews. The Planning Commission and City
Council shall consider the effect of the proposed use upon the health, safcty, convenience and
general welfare of the owncrs and occupants of the surrounding land, in particular, and the
community as a whole, in general, including but not limited to the following factors:
L 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;
City oiArden Hills
Planning Commission Meetingfor Septemher 6, 2006
e IIAfelro-inet.us'!ardenhilfs'PlollninglPfnnning Olses',l006'i06-025 AMT Inc JJ Taylor Site pran Review (PENDING)\ORJOU6 PC report - AMT
fne Sile P/a/1 Review.doc Page5of8
5. Visual and land use compatibility with uses and structures on surrounding land;
adjoining land values; .
6. Park dedications where applicable; and the
7. Orderly development ofthc neighborhood and the City within the general purpose
and intent of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Development Plan for the
City.
Findin2s of Fact
Staff offers thc following findings for consideration:
On the Zoning Ordinance Lot Requirements:
L The proposed modifications are in confomlimce with the lot requirements in Section 5.F
of the Zoning Ordinance.
On the Parking Regulations:
2. The size and location ofthe proposed parking is in conformance with Section 6.F ofthe
Zoning Ordinance,
~ The proposed parking stalls meet all req uired parking setbacks,
.,.
4. The applicant is providing 67 parking spaces on the property where at least 81 would be
required based on building size. The applicant currently has a shared parking agreement
with 1260 Grey Fox Road, which is also occupied by J.J. Taylor Distributing. If
additional parking is needed on the 1300 Grey Fox Road property, there is sufficient .
space on the property for more parking.
On the Special Use Permit Evaluation Criteria:
5, The proposed use will increase parking and make the property more conforming to the
Zoning Ordinance, The increase in parking will eliminate thc need for on-street parking.
6. The proposed use will not produce any signilicant additional noise, glare, odors,
vibration, smoke, dust, air pollution, heat, liquid or solid waste, or any other nuisance
characteristics, 'lucre may be temporary dust or odors during construction.
7. The proposed use is unlikely to signilicantly affect drainage. This proposal may need
Rice Creek Watershed Approval.
8. The proposed use will not affect the population density of the neighborhood. The
parking lot expansion is for existing employees.
9. The proposed exterior modifications to 1300 Grey Fox Road will likely have a neutral or
positive impact on adjoining properties.
10. The park dedication fee does not apply to this proj eel.
11. The proposed modifications are in conformance with the requirements of the Zoning
Ordinance. The proposed modifications are not in conflict with the Comprehensive
Development Plan,
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meetingfor September 6,2006
IV'vfelro-iI/Cl.usl,ardenhillslflalllJingIPlanning Cases\2006W6-025 AMrIne jJ Tay/or Size Plall Review (PENDING)!083006 _ PC repor/ AMT e
hTe Site Plan Revfew.doc Page 6 of 8
Resident Comments
. Staff has not received any letters, e-mails, or telephone calls from property owncrs or occupants
in regard to this planning case. However, site plan reviews do not require a public hearing or
public notice.
Staff Recommendation
Based on the submitted plans and eleven findings offact, Staff recommends approval of
Planning Case #06-025 for the Site Plan Review to modify the property at 1300 Grey Fox Road,
StalTrecommends the following eight conditions be included with the approval:
1. The project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted. Any significant
changes to these plans, as determined by the City Planner, shall rcquire review and
approval by the Planning Commission.
2. The applicant shall obtain and submit a copy to the City all necessary permits from Ricc
Creek Watershed before a building permil is issued and before constmction begins.
3. All of the parking stalls shall be striped,
4. Any damaged parking blocks shall be replaced in all parking areas.
5. The trees along Grey Fox Road shall be retained.
6. If feasible, thc trees in the median that will be rcmoved shall be relocated to another
portion ofthe property,
7. The applicant shall comply with the memo Irom the City Engineer dated August 28,
. 2006.
8 The applicant shall provide at least three ADA accessible parking stalls that are subjcct to
review and approval by the Building Official.
Options
1. Recommcnd approval as submitted.
2. Recommcnd approval with conditions.
3. Recommend denial with reasons for denial. If the City denies the petitioners request, "__.it
must state in writing thc reasons for the denial at the time it dcnics the request."
4. Table for additional information.
Deadline for A2encv Actions
The City of Arden Hills reccived the completed application for this request on August 8, 2006.
Pursuant to Mirmesota Statc Statue, the City must act on this request by October 8, 2006 (60
days), unless the city provides the petitioner with writtcn rcasons for and additional 60 day
review period, The City may, with the consent of the applicant, extend the review period beyond
the initial 120 days.
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting/or J.)'eptember 6,2006
. '1IMetro-inct.us'lordenhi!!s\P!a/lningIP!allning Cases',2006W6-025 AMTIne - Jj Taylor Site Plan Review (PENDING)I083006 PC repOrl - AMT
fne Site Pian Reviewdoc Page 70r8
Attachments
3A,l Application and statement from the applicant .
3A-2 City Engineer review
3A-3 Air photo and photographs of the site
3A-4 Survey and Site Plans
.
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission /vfeetingfor September 6, 20U6
\\Melro-inel.us',ardenhills'tPlanningWhmnillg Crrses12006106-025 AUT fne - JJ Taylor Site P!nn Revielll (PENDiNCi) \083006 - PC report _ AMT .
Jnc Site Plan Review.doc Page 80f8
.
Attachment 3A -1
Application and Supporting Materials
from the Applicant
.
. September 6, 2006, Planning Commission Meeting
~ Planning Case No.
. ~HILLS
Submittal Date
1245 West Highway 96 Application Accepted By
Arden Hills, Minnesota 55112 Receipt Number
Telephone (651) 634-5120 Council Decision
Fax (651) 634-4137 Council Decision Date
www.ci.arden-hills.mn.us
2006 LAND USE APPLICATION
Applicant Information
Applicant: f)mT /.."'-G
Address: Po LfJX .~fl
---~--
Telephone No.: 7~3- ?J3-~9/.,{
Fax No.: 7& 3- /}S'3 -O?Oc5F
Email Address: tVSOI} (cd /so'. /Je r
/ -
Property Information
Property Owner f) m 1 /-jj!
--~~._---
Owner Address fJ 0 Lid X i,VO/f'
----
Address of Property Involved: /300 0rev Fo x tfd'
. Legal Description: Ex E 390 3/itJ Ff ihe Fo/ Pnr-t ;J~v_
Of.......2tJ 0 L ! /J e ;(' r Jf / (,d Il o~ of /I fP.yfrolrffJ:J)
Property 10 No.: ....d.J.. 30 Ci 3-1.3. OcJc:J7___.
Current Zoning:
Type of Use: VJa rgJ) OUfj e / [)t5 fn OUrru n--r;,11 fer ---=
Property Acreage: ~.1.jf(!J"es ,
(Jpe of Request' -Applicants are responsible for 1
reimbursement 01 consultant j
Apportionment of Assessments (S30) fees associated with filing. ,
o Comprehensive Plan Amendment (S300) .
revie....;ing, and processing of ,
J
o Final Plat (including in Preliminary Plat) this application. Such fees are to 1
o Minor Subdivision (lot spilt/consolidation) ($300) be p8id in escrow up front or ~
..
o Planned Unit Development (S600 + escrow) upon receipt of statement from .,
I
o Preliminary Plat (S400 + S25 per lot + escrow) the C,ty of Arden Hills. Fees ".i
,
include costs for consultants j
."1
~ezOning ($300) retained by the City and include .j
SIte Plan Review ($400) consultant planning services. .,
o Special Use Permit or Amended Special Use Permit (S300) attorn ey, and engineer. 1
o Vacation of Easement ($250 .... escrow) Payment of park dedicatjon .~
fees, established by City "
o Variance (Sign Ordinance) (S250) Ordinance, are r-eqUlred with ,i
o Variance (Zonrng Ordinance) (S250) certain procedures.
. o Zoning Ordinance Amendment ($300 + escrow) ~;;~""'t'1&)-.Kw:'''',,:".,:I;',~ <';if.;"-':.'; . -~!::~~~""c:f~,,;C),,_ .:~;,' ~:' +k~
PJgc j ui"-,
,
Brief Description of Request ~ase also include a.detailed letter explaininq the project): .
L rfdie m&r":;1;/;pJPfl~e () 0 rf0:J- t;, Nnv cd
rOt? fJet'f15s;r () jJarJvhq (11/ 0rpc;l;:oK flood
J J
- ,_ _n
00/ [)!?S'Cflpfrun 0/Jf.' of' 6& 1../ of' 5e. 1'/ ( 5 C/OI
-
/ cJ I?d5f) fJd ~:5m -!-6 ) 7/1/ See. d2 7 ...-. If IV :23
/j'/"d.o
---------
-,-~---
Filinq Requirements and Payment of Fees
The City requests that you make a pre.application meeting with the City Planner to discuss the
application process, requirements, and deadlines. The undersigned acknowledges that she/he
understands that before this request can be considered, all required information and fees (including all
deposits) must be paid to the City in advance. If additional fees are required to cover costs incurred by
the City, the City Planner has the right to require additional payment from one or more of the
undersigned, who shall be jointly liable for such fees. Such expenses may include (but are not limited to)
direct city payroll and overhead costs, fees paid to consultants and other professionals, and the cost of
printing, mailing, and supplies. The City may withhold final action on a land use application and/or .
rescind prior action until all miscellaneous fees have been paid. Applicants are advised that an escrow
deposit is required at the time of the submittal of the Land Use Application to offset costs associated with
the proposed project.
ReQuired Submittal Information
The City of Arden Hills requires the following submittals for all Land Use Applications:
. A certified land survey.
. Site plan(s) (for all development projects).
. Five (5) large scale copies, folded in sets no larger than 8 y," x 14- with the print side facing out,
. Fifty (50) copies of 11"x17" reductions of ALL PLANS MUST BE 3.HOLE PUNCHED AND Z.
FOLDED.
. Mailing labels of all properties within 350 feet of the property (this information may be obtained from
Ramsey County).
True and accurate representation of the requirements outlined in the procedural form for the specified
type of request is the responsibility of the applicant.
Complete/Incomplete Applications
An incomplete application will delay the processing 01 land use requests. The application approval time
commences and an application is considered officially filed when the City Planner has received and
examined the application and determined that the application is complete. A decision on whether the
application is complete or incomplete shall be made within fifteen (15) days following the submittal of the
application. When the application is deemed to be "complete" it shall be placed on the agenda of the first
possible Planning Commission meeting occurring at least thirty (30) days from the date of official .
submission of the application.
Page 2 on
,
Notice of Meetinq Attendance
. In order for the Planning Commission and the City Council to consider any application, the applicant or a
designated representative must be present at the scheduled meeting. If not, the matter will be tabled until
the next available agenda.
Aqenda Deadline and Meetinq Schedule
The deadline for submittal of land use applications is required according to the schedule outlined below.
There are no exceptions. All Planning Commission meetings are held on the first Wednesday of each
month at 7:00 PM. City Council meetings are held the last Monday of the same month at 7:00 PM.
Meetings are held in the Council Chambers at the City of Arden Hills, 1245 West Highway 96, Arden Hills,
Minnesota 55112, unless otherwise stated. Applicants are advised that additional meetings and/or
workshops are scheduled when necessary upon approval of the Planning Commission.
2006 SCHEDULE (*subject to change)
TENTATIVE TENTATIVE
PLANNING CITY COUNCil
COMMISSION MEETING
APPLICATION MEETING' DATE'
DEADLINE (Generally held on (Generally held on
DATE* 1" Wednesday at 7:00 .m. . last Msnday at 7:00 pm)
Dec"mbet5(200S) Jartl.J~!y<l.. .. ' Janu1'lw30
Janua 3 Februa 1 Februa 27
F~bru"ry6'
March 6
. June 7 June 26
July 3 ust
c,i , il,'August~1
I~ ,. ".S6c~~~:f~~ 30
(\loveml;er27
November 6 December 11
December 4 January 29 (2007L..
-- --,-
Acknowledqement and Siqnature
e information listed in the City of Arden Hills Land Use Application
sible for all costs incurred by the City related to the processing of
7/01 7/{}/P
Date
Please contact the City Planner at (651) 634.5134 if you have any questions regarding your application.
Additional copies of this application form are available on the City's website:
. htto:l/www. ci.arden-hills_mn. us/Deoartments/Communitv Develooment/Plannin%lannina forms. htm
Pagd aD
. 7-17.06
City of Arden Hills
Attention: James Lehnhoff
1245 West Highway 96
Arden Hills, MN 55]]2
Re: U. Taylor Distrbuting Company of Minnesota
Parking Lot Expansion
Dear lames
As requested the following is a breakdown as to why we are in need of additional parking
spaces. Currently we have] 40 employees on record. With the road construction that was
completed on Grey Fox & the decision to eliminate all street parking we are in desperate
need to create additional parking spaces to accommodate our employees. When street
parking was allowed we had approximately 20 cars utilizing Grey Fox to park. As you
can sce by the preliminary plan we are creating additional 20.25 spaces. I hope this letter
helps & if you need any additional information please give me a call.
. Sincerely
~~ L
Blian ,.!l"unc
Safety/Facility Manager
cc. John Schellenbach
.
--- -----
----
8-]7.06 .
Re: 1..J. Taylor Distrbuting Company of Minnesota
parking lot expansion.
To: James Lenhoff, City of Ardcn Hills
From: Brian Aunc
Dcar James,
As requcsted, the following is a brcakdown o[the number of parking spaces available to
us at the] 260 location. Wc have 85 spaces for regular parking & 2 handicapped spaces.
This is broken down into multiple locations through out the grounds.
My sccond rcquest via this letter is to rcquest approval rrom the city to allow us to park
on Grey Fox for the duration of the parking lot construction. Once we have received
approval trom the city council we will he starting construction immediately. 1 will be in
touch with you once we have an official datc for starting the project. By complcting this
project it will give us a long term so]ulion to our parking lot needs. 1 hope this
information helps you & if you have any further needs please contact me at 651-234-
0600.
.
Sincerely
~~ (\
\..,(..
-
Brian Aune
Safety/Facility manager
cc: John Schellenbach
.
.
August 16, 2006
Mr. James Lehnhoff, City Planner
City of Arden Hills
1245 West Highway 96
Arden Hills, MN 55112
Dear Mr. Lehnhoff:
J. J. Taylor Distributing Company of Minnesota has occupied the building at 1260 Grey
Fox Road since 1979.
J. J. Taylor has recently extended its lease to March 31,2010, and has an option to
extend to March 31, 2013.
. Farhet Partners and The Philip T. Resha Trust are the owners of 1260 Grey Fox Road.
We understand and support the plans for additional parking that have been submitted to
the city.
Both 1260 Grey Fox Road and 1300 Grey Fox Road are completely leased by Taylor
and have shared parking for over twenty years without a problem.
Thank you for your consideration of the request.
C~ (2~
~ ' .. ~ '
\ \ b-,
".~ ",:'y V
Thomas W. Resha, Trustee
.
AMT LLC .
P. O. Box 64019, St. Paul, MN 55164
August 17,2006
Mr. James Lehnhoff
City Planner
City of Arden Hills
]245 West lIighway 96
Arden Hills, MN 55112-5743
RE: Planning Casc #06-025
1300 Grcy Fox Road
Dear Mr. Lehnhoff:
Pursuant to your request made to Mr. Brian Aune with J. J. Taylor Distributing Co., Inc.,
confirmation of additional information is as follows: .
I) Lease period between AMT, LLC and 1. J. Taylor runs through March 31,
2010.
2) AMT, LLC is supportive of the parking lot expansion.
3) Shared parking between 1300 Grey Fox Road and 1260 Grcy Fox Road
properties leased by J. 1. Taylor Distributing Co. is acceptable while J. J.
Taylor Distributing Co. continues to lease our 1300 Grey Fox Road property.
If there are any furthcr questions, please don't hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
AMT, LLC
By
Au rey M. Yo
.
.
Attachment 3A - 2
City Engineer Review
.
. September 6, 2006, Planning Commission Meeting
. ~
~ EN HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 28, 2006
TO: James Lelmhoff, City Planner
FROM: KrIstine Giga, Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: Planning Case #06-025: .J.J Taylor Parking Expansion
The following are comments based upon a review of the plans dated July 12, 2006:
General/overall SIte desIgn
. The developer will be responsible for obtaining all necessary permits, which may include, but are not
. limited to.. NPDES and Rice Creek Watershed District.
. Please include a benchmark on the plan sheets.
. The plan sheet must be signed by a registered engineer.
. It appears that the regional pond is adequately sized for the proposed increase in impervious area.
Shcet 3
. Correct the proposed pavement striping note to 4", not 4'.
. Please clarity the first restoration note: it states "all disturbed paved areas to receive 4 inches of
topsoil.. seed and mulch..." Should this read "all disturbed unpaved areas"?
.
\\Melru-inet.us\ardcnh ills\PR&P\V\Engineering\2006\Planning Cases\06-025 _ JJ .. Taylor.doc
.
Attachment 3A - 3
Air Photo Map and
Photographs of the Site
.
. September 6, 2006, Planning Commission Meeting
- ---..--
.",
~.
&
.=
;; .g
"
5 m
Ii 'i: 3
~ "~ -
ID ~ 'jl '" 8
""" " ,
1D]j~ 0 ~ _" ~
=c.<~ ".~ M
]l:j,8NIi""B'i:~~ -g 0
v ~.c"'O",", m Fl
"'o'~~80~b~I" " .
.~!i5" tt c; .{iclo.oo
iii, "'" 0 ,. I'(] .,', "" ~"
I j,' J!'\=- ~ , .
H;' I ".. " Him
~ ~ I , L .~ ~~.g
, ~ .. I1f/ 'IJ H'
. . ; ~;."
" 1 ,;1', l,i
\: r;L. ", )&, U " "
! ~"E
J . .....J: . .~~ ~
L8' . ~~Q
i c- . A" " ,
," l' L F ..~ Iv.-) ..i"~]8
,,! rc ,= f-ciO
F/IA ~ '~,( · \C~'1i' m
' /( -'c.. I, ~ ""
~ ;1,; j {- p~~: II I elL 1 1 . ~!!
· 7 ", ,:-, '= '.. 0t, ~"l
'" ".L~ /, !~~' , , .
~ , .... .,. . '",
o r n II -11' ." d ',,/ '"
0: ~~:t'~ .... ""'q
'I,Z)> " . ,
" ~ ," I ccj'!' ' ~ ~!;
,;: :1 I \ ",I . 1 '11 t-' I "', ~c!ilffi ! ~ J::i
>>,! / ',.' .\ "- ....... ,. ," ~. ':"
., I " .p, c,: ',,,
" ~!/ - J 'i '.. eeL I,J _,"
o / ~ 3"' 0
o C- i_ / ~ ~ , II : ~( oj,
- I ,. l E..,,,,
- /. t, "", " " ,",
'" - C.' "',
~12.. . ~,! t":iv~ ~ ~l' J!~
~: ~p; r'o ee. _"
. , , "'" [( 11 iCO
V ~ U~~~c:',',-r c!" ,;!
(, '~~~?;;.r:J)) I' I, VC:. .;..~ ~
;. [" J..l'o ~ >...l
.. ~ \,,< ~~1~~3Z. ';E ~
#-" ld t;::. /;;~ m~'~ "'h
r / '"
~ ~~ ~~N
Co' '~)1 F' J"'
...... ,- '\ , ;'l ~
;{;, i-C-l;;; -- j .0 ~
~~~t: F rJ~ , "
l1' 'It, 'f i\if\~ ,j
b \\'; t _ 2
IWlJ tS:k'iZ' ,(; JiS\~ i\i2. 'I !
~~S~t':'X0 ~ ' 6" \, ' , ' !
I*:~ II J ~ '''-.Jcl. ~ "
i &.. J. L2b
I -l
.-
- ..
> ..,
~ "
~ '" _
~ ~ .~
<: '" -'" '"
~~f;Y; 1~ "
'iijm3~~ ~ ~iii .0
9- u tl r ?c ::: '" r5 <::: ~
~~E!;t~.g~~~!m ~
:i:il s,~8il:o.:~~::ri=: a
u
,\;"\ n "
'Z.... <2
'0 ~
" co
" 0
" N
0 .00
"gb::::
E 5 ...
<8"'-<
l::~o;
.- 0.....
~e-.@
5 5.~
"0-
o u "
~~:E
I , " ~
X I .-~ ~
o <V...
0 .~ ""''''0
II.. ro;...>C:
:a02.::
>. f~'G
~. l!! ro "
I uoo
I ~, C) rouE
.~..n E
0 g.; 8
(I\f (Q s.- ...
'0<2
"0 N :2~8
....
C':l J-. ~o
0 ~~~
~ 0",0
~ 0
w ro 0
~ "O~-<
~ ~ E~
0 "'"
~ ... 0-'0
.D oo~
,2.='"2
..... "'C)"EO
"ro U
<l.l "'0 eQe
... " "
0"
Co' .~ ~"E
'020
0 l:: g......
\0 .~ :'"d
'0" "
N j::":::o;I
<-:o~
- 6'"'g ~
~ " ~
o ~
" v
0 " ~E 5
0 go8
p.(;;...
~ EV..2
- 'O~
'"O~o
~-g~
0" .
U N
~~t>
>,'-'
;:::: -:;:I
';; ~%'~
-00
'. . .~ F'Ji:~'" ~ 8 2
~6o
:~'u 8
000
...W <I>;:j~
: : I ,-:'~~' " ,,:- . .- 0 3"
o:c ro
, r;lil'P'( # 0_...,
E~<v
"'.~..s::
:2'O~
c~Ol;.;~. tj~(Q l . ;s~ f-~
..0::1\0
","0
WOo
" ':~::';'~~ 2;~
"''''''''''-,~ '.' '-'"'-> ~~:.:
- ':-, ",:;,~ ... .'Y ..., ~
;U.;L", --".~.",- U ;:j
~". b" "' "lii ~
~;:.. .:.... '~, -, ,.\l,".,~._"..__ Q
. ,~~'-::- :-',dc...t__'~'J<
r
~ ,,:,-,'- .
( u
. --,~" - " ~
,', , "
1~' '%: "'
~
., ,{;: 01
./ _:;; u
"'
,"-", ...'., ',.-.-" -~" '"
.C"'; \:,"'~c\ ~(_ ~'., ,,' . ^ 0
."'--".'-' ~
.
"
(j),
0.
. -
-
.
ro
~
ro
>.
(j) l/l
(j) L l/l
L ::> ~
Ot) Ol
E .0. (j)
" (j) J::
"J:: -
ro_ .....
0..... 0
_ 0 -
l/l
"1: ro
(j) Ol (j)
C. .C (j)
.C 0 .r: .
- - Ol
l/l_ O.~
' l/l
(j) -- -.><:
L OlL
(j) g> e ro
.0 __ -- 0.
.><: -c (j)
o L
- ro ro L
Olo. 0.0
.~ ~ OlE
-i: (j) L"
Pu
roz ,~ ro
0. >< 0
0l0l w_
e e
~~ .
l/l L
.x co
W 0.
Ol
L
:;;;:
L
Ol ro
L 0.
:;;;: ro
L
ro L
0. 0
:;:;
ro :0
e "
0 ro
:;:; L
:0 0
" .....
ro "
L (j)
0 >
..... 0
TI E
(j) ~
>
0 (j)
E .0
IJ.) 0
L -
IJ.) TI
.0 L
g ro
"0 .~ .
e >.
ro l/l
.~ l/l
ro
L
I >. CJ
l/l
l/l
ro
L
CJ
-
.
(J)
c
:.:2
~
ro
0-
Q)
.c
~
....
0
~
(j)
Q)
:;;
Q)
.c
~
0
~
(J)
c
c
Q)
~
()
(j)
(J)Q)
c 0
._ c
~ ro
(j)
.- ~
x~
. w a3
..
I
Q)
j .c
~
....
0
i c ~
0 0
t (J)
0 C
0- :.:2
c ~
~ <0
Q) 0-
~
(j) Q)
ro .c
Q) ~
Q) c
.c (j)
~
~ c
0 Q
.... ;;:
OJ TI
C C
C 0
Q) ()
Q) , OJ
.....
O~ C
. (j) 0 -'"
g'(J) ~
ro
._ c 0-
~ .- TI
.~ 1
X ..... <IJ
ro TI
W 0- :;;
0
.....
0
.
Attachment 3A-4
Survey & Site Plans
.
. September 6, 2006, Planning Commission Meeting
/'
..
.
Westwood Pl"Qtessional Services
MEMORANDUM 7699 Anagram Drivt;,
Eden f>rairie, MNS5344
. MA'" 952-937-5150
'" 952-937-5822
lCcL fHE 1-888-937-5150
fMI'.ll wps@west\voodps.com
'" Date: August 4, 2006 www.westwoodps.com
Re: J. J. Taylor Distributing
Westwood File 20051027.00
To: Brian Aune, J.1. Taylor Distributing Company of Minnesota
From: Gretchen Landini
Dear Brian,
As requested, the following is a summary of the existing and proposed impervious and
building areas on the J. J. Taylor Distributing site in Arden Hills.
An aerial map has been used to approximate some of the existing impervious areas, as
noted on the attached sketch. The remaining areas are based on field survey
information. The existing areas are as follows:
. . Site area: 313,057 s.f.
. Building: 81,046 s.f.
. Parking/sidewalk impervious: 52,677 s.f.
. Total Impervious: 133,723 s.f.
. Percent Impervious: 42.7%
The proposed impervious areas are based on the aerial map as well as the Westwood
Site Plan dated 07/12/06. The proposed areas are as follows:
. Site area (same as existing): 313,057 s.f.
. Building (same as existing): 81,046 s.f.
. Parking/sidewalk impervious (6,980 s.f. added to existing): 59,657 s.f.
. Total Impervious: 140,703 s.f.
. Percent Impervious: 44.9%
.
s .,. :\, L i ~. '-j i;. f. TWIN CITIE5IMETRO ST, CLOUD BRAINERD
. . . ..
. .
I
,
i
I
rn '" ~ ~
>'
')( 4 - . ;P\,.
-' -"
~. o ..."
~ ~ \ i
0
& u:: ~ ~.
~
1 ? ~ ~.
~ CL . ,~ ,
U\ ~
-'
0 cr :s'
G ~<-S:>
tf\
[ ~~
-'
0 e..
:::5
-
..
-
d
0
(-4 Z
.. '" ~ g
il!,l~~ ;:::;; ';~~ i-l'E;Q' Z " co
,~ ;~~~ ~~ ;~I ~~~A ~ f-.: , ~
-........ a~~; g' ~~~ ~!';;2),' -;
!'=l~i :~ 5~~ :;;~~~ '.j,i . ~
i:~!li~ iQ~ ::is ~~!~'!f 1)
gi!l!l:,.. i""g 2i"~ ~..~'"' Ii "
! Pi Jff~( ~m ~~ i.i ~;;i 1..1' j [
AI ....i/I:!5 ll." ",Fe.- "'<)-1 ~ ' ::>
- f h~ ~'" "a~ ~2i Q' ' 9-
l! I!i' ~~~ ~~ !,. 2~~ '1 ~
.- ......1: 5.. ::to ;!!i "'" ~
hi I l, '. .1 '!i ~ .. if! !
ia~ f B ~ d~ ~:-.., lco ,,- 0 <0 l'
J :If . "'" .. f:g _
, ~o. ~"j.' ,
. 0>' ~,
,-0 ~'T~ ~
~~~ '. >:J i" .... 0 i
~@~ ,.;s jf U ~ .... It> i
:!;i :;:l ~ ' ." <:q ,- .
.~~ ., ~ls!8 ~"h .. I
..f 5'8 "~S~/ zz
Jo... ,'f / ----- r:;;~
i':f ..! ' ~ -f>. -< ~
CIj "., 926 1J,-
If 11- ~ ..1 ~8
J ;,; <.,~"
l' ~~s t;j ~~~.~ gOJ .-
~. I~ '" i ~~<i .", / z"./
,sel: Ilt :;l",. i -..~_fT1:l=, "................ ~; ~
:r:;1!Ii ~)>fT1 ", ,~t; . I C)
~ I rrt '"" Ii '~~ ..'., .'. ...... ../ --......'.' ... ... ~
,-1 '"' '"' ." " 'f.-- --...... ~ -
. I :>'i.!: 'of'; I'T1 ;;j', ____ ,N ~..~
f '.1 ~e~ g ~ ~_~""_/ (;;os.'' --<
f PI !;i ~ _ I-.c. ~.:-I . >rj
1[. gl Q (9 . ~
I' ,,({ 'c::J
~ . ~~ ~
. I ~ 0
~ , >
~~ a
. f "~
'i: "';ll
a . ...0
."
I <0
.~!! .
, . " M"
5 ~ zo
.;:l 'ilQ
, >
" Zo
- -Oil: no
~ )>-po t! f'1z
co ;;in" I:':l
1J "'0 ;:: ~:t: ~
-----.j___J--.- ;:c:~ ~o~ =.~ g'\,'b
,.., f! I -< I 'U"'O :5::f""l::t Vl g'L
~ 0)..., ~ t5 a ~p.,., g "
~ ... v . 8 -1a~ C1
z ..... + >." ~ ~ ,
Cl .,;I )> " z ....
ill _ I~:~ 0 n
I ~ .
. L ~
z
n
it it ~ ""q
f ( 928 "" !
~ ~
. "!',. [ ,
51!'! ~Iild~ ,!;"l~ ~ ~ ~ 8;!;~
,e n'~ G~!" ~." ~"\ ~. m __ ~:\
~~ g-<f' ~~; .I~ I. -'" -<:; ~ s":......., <rt// . "-
~ d!l! ':<~,..~~" :t ~!iI 1 '>l,..... ~.:.- "
l:! f: EC~ ~0';11\ ~i!l ~eI "'1 !<~~!;;! - ""- ....
g", ~;:l~~ ,,~ ::!~ "';I'" ' I'" ~ ~~ ~ /
~~ ~~~:\l ~~ ~ ~%~ i! "'o~~ Jg dill;:' 1> '?'!" 3 ~
I .~ ",~I '! ~"" I ~&~, I~ l'~' a.. < -0.. -k." 'e,
"" ,,~ ~.. ~I ~z ... ... ~ ~~1:"" -I,
~. "1 '," ~, "'"1 . .1 '...... ~ ~O
,., il~ '" " ....."",.,.... ';10 ~ ~
if ~~ ~8 ~i . ~. ) Q.. <'$
'00 ' " " 5' p. "
';; - </
~~.." C q,1>
-- ~ ;." IS" + (JI ~ ~ I,., i "
. ..... :ri>l i!';- " '\
i:! '"' " ...... 1 ;
'7"" ! ~ ~~ 0 ";;() f 't -8 ; '-..
.., c>,,~o
i~ C/)~.oO"'....
~- :=h ~ CI\ ~
~" g ,:p .~. 0-
r-3 Hnf! 0 ~r6'
,... tj <0' t:: ~
ii 0 l!!"'1Il ,
. ' .'~
a :o:l ~. jO~~ III
. . {Jl 2" V'
l5. ,.... ,ll~!i
!!l '"1 .GO
~;: ,~~
s:: "
~ i~
"""". "'; ~ C'l ~l:: "~r Q x :".<. a. ,.. ~ "._... 'p_ ~_ _ _~ ~ C'l
=' .gH;'~ l~!1 "',., a'- r: :~ [l~~ g'~ l~~~~ :~'~!=!l ;I f' :~!i~HqH:" ~: ~11~!" 1: !q~l~ g~~~ At
,..,. . ~,"'~1ta...", g- II!:O" ~ "0 ~ ,,, !"..~ g,-,,~,. ~ .' 1;>"3o!l:<>...,,,~,g! !!.= ......,~::" l'~' _I>" "".' !\-
"""" 2 .'t,,",,' "O;";::j ...: ~;>. . a. 3"3'<> ii ';l "" "og: ~3'" !'..." .. ~ "0 ..Q.o- {l is 9- "/',"" <>3"S"- '.. 5i'
'>! -:~~,!l(!.l~ AI ;.; [: llQ ~~ ~~?: ;. a ;~~.;! it"~~ii !!. ;~. ~s::,3];l~~ig ~~ -~~'~_g ~~ ~~'H-..J 2.~~g ~
z<"l "on :l Zr:l'. ;;"" ~~ -;;I ~ '" ""-'0 !..,,,~.. 113'" ll.",~ --a:~o l<'''- 3".""_ !!" :::q--'-~ _ <L_
'ili ~s!;:;~ 8 ~ l" t~ Q H i~ i ~ [:n.l ~hi~ ~. [[ .:l[;iO~~'~.~li=[ ~~ ~,jg1a !"~ ;;'~~~~~ ['q~ ~
l"~ Q:"g.;@,l g, ~;;:~!j :g ,~:l <>. 3 3.!!.q,~_l :l[BJ ~ ~; ~3-...J:1-,]:~~ =", "",.t",ll : s9.{l~h a~~ll 5'
~ ,,_ - 0. "" Ii> n " .."" :'"._ .. _0 ~_ , .. .., _, ':r
.. ~:l.. if " g. ~."::;, "'9 5!!. i :rigll!l- ~~c"'- ~ !l~ n!!.!l.ltl;;.a~ g~. .... o"~~! II "'0..'<0,, ~Cl..."J.
i ~~~l;2: ..~ ~ 1: ~3 c: .3~ H "i 3~S~':l. h&~2, ~ "g ~S'a"l:~~'og.g"g ~o &!.",[r? !, g~g~H '""3gg ae;
'I ~~t;lz.;; ~g g B. 8: ~M ~z. '; h'~"'~ ;;l~~g ~. g.,_ ~"g~,.g;:. ~ag Ml: :is'''d 11 i,ll~g,~~ ,hi n
! .....~" ~~ " ,,""'" 0' ";';;' ~." ..." !.8.n ""~-~"""" !!. ~ll i~=!I"""<"l_~~ a", ~S:g""'" <> "'~l"'~2 "2" ~
~~~l~ ~; O.i. ~ l:l ~i:i : H,:lJ H';,;~ ~ .=~ !!J:;,~~~:~~~.?' ;g, ~~d~ '[ ~_<;~~:r~ ;;~g
:~[H ;~ l &: ~ ~f a~:3 3 ~:~~~ H~H ~ ~~ ~~1;!,-~1;{~~,~l ~~ ~ihg j: hg~i~ ~~~ ~
~fTl ;? ~g~~R or'. ~ "" ~.g ~': 'f'" ~'i !I&~~f1 3,,"_:~': ~ p ~~~!Iif~~g,~g:g ~: :[;;:!o 3' ~~"'~~~ 8..~~, ~,
:::. I-j "',"-Il2.~.\ 2. fl! "':r ~.3: .. !'t....'<!,;' "l:=i'!~ '" "'_ _;;0":1,,"0 "",,~ ::. ll"ll.",n n ;o~a"~~ ~~!1 0
lfJ~ ~ ~!-a~~ S'<i ,,:r::l.g";;~~!t ~ii'ig." ::;g.~2.-g '" !';!!. ~"~:i~11~~il.'!l~ g!l <>!!.;;-'(l :l ~-:;-~"'g ~!!..'" l:l
o::l :;I ~!!-"'~;; ""% ~ 0 ~~:r"'.... ""'3-""g ago ""~ "I i'!t _,~:;"a"-3"oi '" :l~..!lll. !l -<>:l",,~" ~_;> ()
i];<D 0Cl 'g:~~[ [~ ~,::f ~ =' g-~ r: i~ ~:!l~~ g~!l~! ~~ ;~2a!:Ha~ ~; ~~.~J,;' ~ :~3-J~~ i~~ 0
1""'-1 -.... ~ 9,-)_ c.;{ ;;.- g OIl ~~ "'~ "g- ~~il"~ ~'i~i1-:- _ :1.. ;;;g.;3!t~"g!l!! K~ ,,~i!!-3' it l'-""';;g.~". ~1l~ a
~ . it 7ii~f; !!.; <i ?. ~3 <i~ gJa~: ~;,~,;.~ :t iH ~'!!.!!.!I:~,~~~-~B 1i.~ ~~~;~ ~ &!~i'~g ai': e..
i ~ ~ ~3 !!J~ *! 1 i a : ;~ :J ~Hfi~ ~tii.~ t, ~~ ~~;~~~!l~!~ ~~ ~i~;i ; ihHJ ~~i_ ~
~ . ~~ i~~,~ ~': ~. ~ ~ 1 ~~ h ;!;~ i,!.!!I'; ; ~~ g:~i~~;~~ h ~~!; ! -;.:~~~!! J~; II
"~ :::.: ~ ~~ ~~~~ fa I ~ <> ~ ~~ ~~ ~l~~ ~~'~; 5 ~i ~";:~~i~~[~~ !~. 3'[!~ !- ~~~:~i H!
v I""""'] 3...~~ ag ;; 9 ~ ~ :;" ~.~_~ s.g....;; ~ M ... '!.~9...~"'..~ "a: !S'''''l !:. n~"'~g" "'!I'"
r ,.. f'Il"l ......,,~ "" '~~- " "~",, _s." "',,"D"', ;; 0' -,"'~i.3~:1 :-;;' s.",:; "g:::",:;...g -~'"
, ,.... ~ "'!::;~-~" '* ;;~ ~g g-:r;" o-~,=. ~"!} g'''"",,,,,, " "'2."~ il !!.::l"""'.. ii-"
,..,. '"< ~~ [e'P~ [, 0 ','" ~.~ i~ !.~aQ; &'~la i ~ ~g.=.:~1~~~~", a 3-~~~I~' ~ [~)H~ ",~1.
"',' - ~ "; " ..., <1! "~, " => \! ~" D" -." ... ~
)0001. ........ "::.: ~ :l ~.2. ':'".~ ~,.\ ..~.. ~ ;; !i.lt"MIi~ ~ g gc,~ ~ g '5" g~' ::i"'_
::I 0 ~~ ~". i:Il ~ b "'!!..il ~~C:-!, .s-",-g-;; ~ " fl.... ~~"';g'" _ ~::...3 .. ~ ";' ~,~"
Q::l ~-I - " ~ ~ ~-n- ' ". "" ~ "._ "":>" ~_ '" <> - _. "'__ "
t'W\ ..... ::::Q ~~ g ~ 3 ~ 'llg..~ ~~,:... ~ :g~'; ~Di!( .. !!.,,," ~;; ~~~ t'~~
U"f.~ [Il~ .. ~ ~ - -!M HM ~~~..-~~ 1 ~!!..>c ~~ :>~~
Z ~ <>.-
Sl o. - ' \ I
r:n~ p ":r1 @ ~~ ~
.... · 0 ;; I I I I 1 Il' I I III ,..
~'5' 0 ~ N f"fliflr@0~~xlleBc!)o A;m@9aBBl~)'*~~"1tl ~ ~r8g:
0"., " () 0 ::::! --< 1)....
!:1... _ - ~~ ~ ;'l}ll'! r-<,:,;..;g~'" :!~~"~::;~;;l':!l~2;:!~~~~ ~ 9g':!l~:;lJ:~'" Q.. gQIm
(") C1 ~ Oz ~ ":..;. Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ : ~ ~ i ~ sl 5l i : ~ ~ i i 2 ~ ~ ~ 2 ~ i ~ ~ ~; ~ ~ f;; ~ ! ~ ~~ sa g
g::! 0<1 (f) ~ Q'" IJ> "''''~ 'f'flll~~S!"" ~~-<j!:~S!z~';~!i'i'~g-<r>n J1i!l_~~;~~ "'g(j}~
,.J'" tii<D Z P\""~iG:1il'" Z;;:! ;;\"""''''ZlIlC'''' ~ s:lI:l: I-' ;;:!" ~~g ~-'I
::r ": f ~ -I> ,.. ~ i ~ i ~ ~ 0 " ~ ~ ~ ~ " s: ~ ~ z,;j c Z ~ ~ ~:;; r-< ~ '" n " 6.~ )> [
o S ,::l a ~ ~!I! "':g 10: ~ ",!i:l!;' M !i: >< r-< e:;u R s ~ i5 ;u ':.'l ~ 0 o~ -'I Q
-"., "8 ~ ;;; g ~ ~ '" ~ '" ~ C P I ~ ... M f' ~ ':.'l ? 1.. fTl <II
"'d '" "----4 ~ ",'" ~ '" 2 ~ '" ... ~ ,.. :tl ti:~ 0 9;
_~ (,.Ion :s,,~ - Z ... N1Z:g
Q) =' ':1 ~ /:\ ~:tl ~ '" .!.8 fTl 5'
::; p.. fil 8 1--1 '" n;C: :z mD ~
gOo. ~ 3 ~ o,~ ~
(,.I~Z ~ : F
-----
- ---------
,
,
~
. ~HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 30, 2006 PC Agenda Item 3.B
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: James Lehnhoff, City Planner
SUBJECT: PC #06-026
Preliminary Plat
Arlene Boutin
1600 Lake Johanna Blvd
Requested Action
The applicant has submitted a preliminary plat application to re.plat 1600 Lake Johanna Blvd
into three conforming lots.
. Revised Application
1. Overview of Request
The applicant is requesting a preliminary plat for 1600 Lake Johanna Blvd, which is located
at the southwest comer of Lake Johanna Blvd and Siems Court on the northeast side of Lake
Johanna. The eastern two-thirds of the property was originally platted as three separate lots
with aceess to Siems Court; however, these lots were combined with a lot to the west at some
point in the past. This proposal would re-plat the one combined lot into three conforming
lots:
Lots Proposed Lot Size (sq. ft.)
Lot I 32,527
.
Lot 2 33,985
Lot 3 45,680
Proposed lots I and 2 would each accommodate one new dwelling. Lot 3 has an existing
dwelling and two accessory structures. Lot 3 would retain all of the 133 feet of shoreline.
City ~f Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meetingfor Septe.,nber 6, 2006
. l\Mclro-inet.u.slardenhillsIPlrmningIPlanning Cases\2006106-026 Bou.tin Preliminary Pial (PEND1NG)\083006 PC Report - Boutin prelimil1m)'
plat. doc Page 1 of to
.
.
The eastern two-thirds ofthe property are vegetated and a wetland occupies the central
portion of the property. The eastern portion ofthe property adjacent to Siems Court is very .
steep but is within the setback and will not bc developed or have the vegetation removed.
The City has a preliminary agreemcnt with the applicant to incorporate the wetland and a
proposed storrnwater treatment pond into the storrnwater management system for the
Ridgewood neighborhood pavement management program. The wetlands and treatment
pond would be included in an easement that would be dedicated to the City and maintained
by the City.
2. Site Data
Future LandUse.PlaIi: Low Density Residential
Existing Land Use: Single Family Residential
Zoning: R.l: Single and Two Family Residential
Size: 2.58 acres (112,192 square feet)
The western portion of the property is relatively flat across proposed Lot 3_ Lot 2
Topography: is somewhat rolling with a significant portion of the lot in a wetland. The western
side of Lot 3 is also in wetland with the eastern side of the lot being very steep up
to Siems Court.
3. Surrounding Area
Direction .
North Single Family Detached
Low Density Residential R.]: Single Family Residential Residential
South Low Density Residential R.1: Single Family Residential Single Family Detached
ResidentiaL/Lake Johanna
[~ Low Density Residential R.l: Single Family Residential Single Family Detached
Residential
Vlest Low Density Residential R-l: Single Family Residential Single Family Detached
Residential
Plan Evaluation
1. Zoning Ordinance
1. 1\tlinimum Lot Area s
(SF per Dwelling Unit)
Single Family 14,000
3. Minimum Lot Size (ft,
width/depth/eorner lot
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting/or September 6,2006 .
\\MetTO-inet.us'l(lrdenhillsIPlanningIPlanning Casesl,2006\06-026 Boutin Preliminary Pint (PENDJNC) 1083006 - PC Report - Boulinpreliminary
plauloc
Page 2 of 10
width)
.
. Single Family 95/1301105
4. Hei2ht (ft.) 35
5. Floor Area Ratio
(FAR.) 0.3
6. Lot Covered by
Structure 25%
7. Min. Landscape Lot
Area 65%
8. Minimum Building
Setbacks (f.tl
Front yard i 40
i
Rear Yard (Principle) . f-.-.~~
RcarYard (Accessory)
Side Yard Interior- I
Principal (Min/total both ,
yards on lot) 10/25
f---L-c-~~-
Side Yard Interior
Accessory 10
Side Yard Comer 40
A. Proposed Lot Size & Dimensions - Meets requirements
. Proposed Lot Size & Dimensions
lot Size (sq. ft,) lot Width (ft.) lot Depth (ft.)
R-1 Zone 14,000 _ ~?_EQ~ c:o~rJ~r lot) 130
Lot 1 32,527 146 ...~
lot 2 33,985 151 246
Lot 3 45,680 158 I' 240
The existing dwelling on Lot 3 is III feet from the shoreline, which exceeds the
minimum 50 foot lake sctback, Lots I and 2 do not have any shoreline. Lot I is a
corner lot and rcquires a minimum 105 foot lot width.
B. Setbacks - Meets requirements
Lois I and 2 are capable of accommodating structurcs that meet the required
fronl, side, and rear sctbacks. Because Lot I has frontagcs on two streets, it is
subject 10 a forty foot setback on lwo sides. The remaining structurc on Lot 3
does cncroach on the 40 foot front yard setback by 16 feet. The portion of the
City aJArden Hills
Planning Commission A4eetingfor Septemher 6, 2006
. II},{clro-inrxus1nrdellhiflsIPlanningl.Plmming Cnses\2006W6-026 Boutin PI'eliminnry Plat (PEND1NGjW83006 - PC Rtporl - Boutin preliminary
pInt. doc
Page 3 of to
home within the front yard sctback was eonstrueted prior to the adoption of this
Ordinance and is a legal, non-conforming structure. The smallcr accessory .
structure on Lot 3 is also a legal, non. conforming structure. The pool area meets
all rcquired setbacks. The applicant is currently eonstructing an addition to the
dwelling that meets all required setbaeks.
C. Impervious Coverage - Meets requirements
Lot 3 will retain the existing house and accessory structures. The existing
structures and driveways on Lot 3 cover 7,425 square feet. The impervious
eoverage of Lot 3 would be 16 pcrcent, which is less than the 35 percent
maXlnlUill.
D. Minimum Buildable Area
Although the City does not havc a minimum buildable area rcquirement, it is
important to eonsider the sizc of the buildable area to cnsure that any new lot ean
accommodate a dwelling comparable to othcr dwellings in the area. The
buildable area generally includes any land outside of wetlands, setbacks,
easements, and steep slopes. Proposed Lot I would have 8,713 square feet of
buildable area and Lot 2 would have 4,723 square feet of buildable area. The
buildable arcas include area that will bc supplemented with fill provided by the
City from the pavement managemcnt program construction area, which is
described below in more detail.
2. Ridgewood Neighborhood Pavement Management Program - Stormwater Management .
Plan
The City is currently in the proccss ofrebuilding the roads and utilities in the Ridgewood
neighborhood, whieh is located east of the subject property. The new stormwater
managcment plan for the Ridgcwood neighborhood is proposed to utilize the wetland on
the subject propcrty for part of the stormwater treatment system. A stormwatcr treatment
pond is also proposed to be constructed along the boundary between Lots 2 and 3 to treat
stormwater beforc it drains into the wetland. Overflow from the wetland will drain into
Lake Johmma.
Most of the existing wetlmld is on Lot 2 with a portion extending into the center part of
Lot 3. Tn order to aecommodate a portion of the stormwater from the Ridgewood
neighborhood, the City will be improving the wetland and removing thc trees from the
wetland to make it more functional (a number oftrees in the wetland are dead or dying).
The treatment pond and the wetland will bc placed in an easemcnt dedicated to thc City
and will bc maintaincd by the City (Attachmcnt 3B.5).
Clt)' of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meetingfor September 6,2006 .
',\Al('fro-illel.l!slardenhif{~IPlal1ninK'IP!flnning Cases12006\06-026 EoU/in PrelimilUlIJ' Plat (PtNlJ/NG) \083006 _ PC Report Boufin preliminmy
pia/. doc
Page 4 oflO
i The wetland and the casements reduce the buildable area for proposed Lots I and 2 to the
,
areas listed in Seetion l.D ofthis report. To reach the buildable areas listed in Section
. I.D, approximately 834 square feet of the northernmost segment ofthe wetland and two
small segments at thc northeastern part of the wetland are proposed to be filled. On Sheet
C.1 in Attachment 3B.5, the wetland to be filled is located inside the proposed City
easemcnt line. To mitigate the wetland loss, the City will expand the wetland along the
southern edge to compensate for the Joss of wetland on the northern side. Additionally,
approximately five thousand cubic yards of excess fill from the road reeonstmction
project will be used for fill in the wetland and to provide a more stable base outside that
is well above a potential flood area in the buildable area for the future homes on Lots I
and 2.
The Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) is the responsible governmental unit for
approving wetland filling and grading. The applicant, with assistance from the City, has
submitted the rcquired documents to the RCWD. Due to the timing ofthe RCWD review
meeting, the decision on the permit was not available in time for the release of this
packet. The applicant will need to submit a copy ofan approved permit from the RCWD
before any wetland filling or grading eould occur. Since the wetland filling is, in part,
related to a City project that involves treating stormwater before it enters Lake Johanna, it
is quite likely that the application to RCWD will be approved. While wctland filling is
usually a cause for concern, this project will help improve the stormwater situation in this
neighborhood and will increase the quality of the water that enters the lake. Although the
wetland will lose some area in its northern edge, the wetland will likely increase in
ovcrall size due to expansion on the southern edge of the wetland.
.
2. Subdivision Ordinance - Meets requirements
A. Easements. City subdivision regulations require twelve (12) foot wide utility and
drainage easements dedicated to the City along the right.of-way and centered on
common lot lines. The City does not assume responsibility for maintenance of
these areas. The easements will allow acecss if it is ever necessary to enter these
areas. The proposal includes a ten (10) foot wide utility and drainage easement
along the right.of-way and centered on common lot lines, which is two feet short
of the required minimum.
B. Grading, Tree Removal, & Erosion Control. As noted abovc, approximately
five thousand cubic yards of fill is proposed to be providcd by the City to fill a
portion of the wetland filling and to raise and stabilize the building pads on Lots I
and 2.
City o{Arden Hills
Planning Commission l'v!eetingfor September 6, 2006
. '.V'v!cfrD-inct,us\ordenhills',PlanningiP!(/!711ing CaseS'12006106--026 Boutin Preliminal}' Plat (PENDINGj',[J83006 PC Reporf- Boutin prelimillaJ)
pial. doc
Page 5 of 10
The City Engineer has reviewed the grading and erosion control plans and does
not have any suggested changes_ The Riee Creek Watershed District is also .
revicwing the grading and erosion control plans.
The proposed trec removal area from the applicant is ccntered on the building
pads at the northern end of Lots I and 2. Lot 3 would not have any trees removed
related to this preliminary plat application. At this time, the applieant is not
proposing to removc any additional trees from the hillside up to Siems Court or at
the rear of the lots. Some trees have been removed by the City in the right.of-way
for the Ridgewood neighborhood pavement management program.
It is important to note that as part of the City's proposed storrnwater management
plan, trees wijj be removed from the wetland and the storrnwater treatment pond
arcas. To increasc the functionality of the wetland, the trees need to bc removed.
These areas will be locatcd in proposed City easements that the applicant has
preliminarily agreed to.
For preliminary plats such as this, the City does not have any landscaping
rcquirements. However, the City does have a preliminary landscaping plan to
enhance vegetation around the wetland, the proposed storrnwater treatment pond,
and near Lakc Johanna Blvd. The applicant is not responsible for this landscaping
plan and it is still subject to alteration by the City. Nevertheless, the landscaping
plan wijj replace some of the removed vegetation and increase the aesthetics of
the proposed lots. .
C. Utilities. Lot 3 will use the existing water and sewer connection. Lots I and 2
will have a new connection to City utilities. Thc developer is responsible Jor the
cost and installation of utilities to the propcrties. Work on ntilities within the City
nght-of.way will require approval from the City's Operations and Maintenance
department and approval from the City Engineer. Since the utilities would be
located in the right.of.way for Lake Johanna Blvd, Ramsey County pennits may
also be required.
D. Access I Street Design. Although the sitc plan indicates that Lots I and 2 will
share a portion of their driveways and access to Lake Johanna Blvd, the applicant
has withdrawn that request and decidcd to move forward with separate driveways.
After discussing the shared driveway proposal with Ramsey County, it was
detennined that separate driveways would adequately serve the lots and meet all
City and County Requirements. Lot 3 would continue to access Lake Johanna
Blvd using an cxisting drivcway. Any new acccss points to Lake Johanna Blvd
would require approval from Ramsey County.
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Adeetingjor September 6,2006 .
I\Mclro-inet.uslill'denhi/ls'PlanniJlg'iPlnnning CasesI2006',06~026 Boutin Preliminm)' Plat (PEND1NCi)\083006 PC Report - BOil/in preliminary'
plnt.doc
Page 6 of 10
--------
E. Park Dedication, Sinee this subdivision results in the creation of two new
residential lots, the park dedication fee applies. Section 1130.08 of the City
. Subdivision Code states that all subdivisions are required to dedicate a portion of
their land for recrcation and conservation purposes. In lieu of the land dedication,
the City Council may require the applicant to pay, as an equivalent contribution,
an amount in cash equal to the percentage of the land rcquircd to be dedicated
multiplied by the fair market value of the property at the time of the final approval
of the subdivision.
Should a fec be accepted in lieu of a land dedication, the park dedication fee
would bc six pereent of the land value of thc propcrty at the time of final approval
of the subdivision.
Maximum Park Dedication Fee
2006 Market
Land Value
1600 Lake Johanna $592,100
Park Dedication % 6%
Maximum park $35,526
dedication fee:
The $592, I 00 land value for 1600 Lake Johanna Blvd does reflcct a parcel that
has 133 feet of lakeshore. The new lots will not be adjacent to the lake and,
. thcrefore, may have a lowcr land value. While this is not an official appraisal, the
average cost per square foot for eight other properties in the same neighborhood
that do not havc lake access and are one property olf of the lake is $4.24 per
square fcct.
Additionally, if a lot in a subdivision is already developed, it has also been
common practice to not include the value of the already developed lot in
detemlining the park dedication fee.
Modified Park Dedication Fee
Acres Sq. Ft. $/sa. ft. Est. 2006 Value
Listed
Market
Value 1600 Lake Johanna Blvd 2.58 112.385 $ 5.27 $ 592,100
Est. Value Proposed Lot 1 0.75 32,670 $ 4.24* $ 138,521
.
Est Value I Proposed Lot 2 0.78 33.977 $ 4.24' $ 144,062
Estimated Value of Proposed Lots 1 & 2 1.53 66.647 $ 4.24' $ 282,582
6% Park Dedication Fee for Lots 1 & 2 $ 16,955
>-Not an appraised value. Based off the average value per square foot of the surrounding lots.
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meetingfor September 6, 2006
. IIMerro-inel.ldiardenhills\Planning'Plmming Cases12006W6.026 Boutin Preliminary Plat (PENDDVGjW83006 ~ PC Report - BourinprelimillmJ
plat.dnc
Page 7 of 10
If a valuc of $4.24 per square foot is used for Lots I and 2, thc estimated value
would be $282,582. Thcrefore, a six percent park dedication fee would be .
$] 6,955.
Staff would recommend setting a park dedication fee between $16,955 and
$35,526. The applicant may also request an official appraisal to set the land value
for determining the park dedication fee; however, the applicant would be
responsible for obtaining an appraisal.
The park dedication fee is finalized by the City Council when the final plat is
approved.
3. Additional Plan Review
Thc City Engineer, City Attorney, Fire Marsha], and the Building Official have reviewed the
preliminary plat application. The comments from the City Engineer are mostly technical in
nature and do not affeet the fundamental design of the subdivision (Attachment 3B-2).
The City Attorney did not have any objections to the proposal.
The Fire Marshal and Building Official did not have any comments regarding this proposal.
Findings of leact .
Zoning Ordinance Findings:
1. The preliminary plat proposal meets or exceeds all of the requirements of the underlying
R-I Zone, including minimum lot size, lot width, and lot depth.
2. The two new lots in the preliminary plat are capable of accommodating a dwelling that
meets all required setbacks and coverage limits without a variancc.
3. Thc existing dwelling and an accessory structure on Lot 3 were legal-nonconforming
structures prior to the preliminary plat applieation. The structures will continue to be
legal, non.conforming structures with the proposed plat.
Subdivision Ordinance Findings:
4. With the proposed wetland modifications and grading, the Lots I and 2 meet or exceed
all of the requirements of the City of Arden Hills Subdivision Code.
5. All three lots are adjacent to the public right-of-way and capable of supporting separate
driveways.
6. A park dedication fee wi Il be required for this plat proposal.
City ulA rden Hills
Planning Commission J\1eelingfor September 6, 2006 .
\IA1ptro-iIH'{,l/s',ardenhillsIPlal1lIfngIFlanning Cases12006i06-026 Boutin Preliminmy Plar (PENDING)i083006 PC Report _ Boutin preliminary
pfarr/oc Page 8 of 10
Staff Recommendation
. Tn Plalming Case #06-026, Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat based on the six
findings of facl and submitted plans. Once the preliminary plat is approved by the City, no
additional conditions related to the design oflhe preliminary plat can be added. The final plat is
simply a review process to ensure Ihat the changes required in the preliminary plat have been
made.
Staff proposes the following sixteen conditions if approval of the preliminary plat is
recommended to Ihe City Council:
I. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City Code and related
ordinanees.
2. The applicant shall submit the final plat and application to the City of Arden Hills
within three months of the preliminary plat approval date or the approval shall expire
unless an extension is granted by the Planning Commission. The final plat shall
reflect all applieable changes in the conditions of approval for the preliminary plat.
3. Thc project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted as part of thc
preliminary plat and final plat applications. Any significant changes to these plans, as
determined by the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning
Commission.
4. The applicant shall include a 12 foot drainage and utility easement centered on all
common lot lines, and a 12 foot drainage and utility easement along the right-of-way.
5. The applicant shall pay a park dedication fee as determined by the City Council at the
. time the final plat is approved.
6. The applicant shall amend the final plat to be in conformance with all of the
comments from the August 28th, 2006, memo from the City Engineer.
7. Any extcnsion of City services for the new lot shall be subject to review and approval
by thc City Engineer and all associated eosts shall be the responsibility of the
applicant.
8. Erosion control measures shall be installed before any grading or construction begins
and shall be maintained and remain in place until groundcover is reestablished and
construction is finished.
9. Any changes 10 the grading or erosion control plan shall be subject to approval by the
City Engineer.
10. Lot I shall use Lake Johanna Blvd as the official access point to the property.
] 1. The applicant shall submit an approved road access pennit for Lots I and 2 from
Ramsey County beforc the final plat is approved.
12. The applicant shall obtain all necessary permits, including the wetland fill permit,
from Ricc Creek Watershed District before the final plat is approved.
13. The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining all other necessary perm;tsfrom
Ramscy County, the State of Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and any
othcr governing agencies whcrc applicablc prior to approving thc final plat.
CifY of Arden Hills
Planning Commission i\leetingforSeptember 6,2006
. IIM('rro-illel_!i~.'L(Jrde/Jhi!!sIP!allllillgIPlal1l1illg Casesl,2006',06-026 Bou/in Preliminmy Plat (PENDIl'iGjW83006 - PC Report Boutin preliminmy
plat.rloc
Page 9 of! 0
14. Trees shall not be removed within the forty foot setback from Siems Court without
approval from the City Planner and City Forester. .
15. Except for the driveways to Lake Johanna Blvd, trees shall not be removed outside of
the proposed trec removal area without approval from the City Planner and City
Forester. This provision shall not apply to trees removed by the City for City related
proj ects.
16. The applicant shall provide an as-built survey upon completion of the project.
Resident Comment
Staff has not receivcd any official letters or telephone calls from property owners or occupants
regarding to this planning casc.
Notice
Notice was published in the Arden Hills/Shoreview Bulletin. A notice was also prepared by the
City and mailed to properties within three-hundred fifty (350) feet of the subject property.
Options
I. Recommend approval of the preliminary plat as submitted.
2. Recommend approval of Ihe preliminary plat with conditions.
3. Recommend denial with reasons for denial. If the City denies the petitioners request, "...it .
must state in writing the reasons for the denial at the time it denies the request."
4. Table for additional infoffilation.
Deadline for Agency Actions
The City of Ardcn Hills reccived the completed application for this request on August 14, 2006.
Pursuant to Minnesota Statc Statute, thc City must act on this requcst by October 14,2006 (60
days), unless thc City provides the pctitioner with written reasons for an additional 60 day revicw
period. The City may with the petitioners' consent extend the review period beyond the 120
days.
Attachments
3B-1 Land Use Application and materials submitted by the applicant
3B.2 City Engineer review comments
3B.3 Rice Creek Watershed District applieation
3B.4 Air Photo and photographs of the site
3B.5 Survey and site plans from the applicant
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission lvfeetingjor Septernher 6,2006 .
IIMetro-inet,IH'ardellhillsIPlaJlllingiPfal1l1ing Cases\2006',06-026 Boutin Preliminary Pint (PENDfNG) '1083006 - PC Report Boutin preliminary
plat. doc
Page 10 of 10
.
Attachment 3B-1
Application and Supporting Materials
from the Applicant
.
. September 6, 2006, Planning Commission Meeting
\
, '
~ For Office Use Only
. ~HILLS Planning Case No. 06-C;
Submittal Date .. ~ <>~-
1245 West Highway 96 Application Compteted Date -I
Arden Hills, Minnesota 55112 Accepted by
Telephone (651) 634.5120 Receipt Number
Fax (651) 634.4137 Council Decision
www.ci.arden-hills.mn.us Council Decision Date
2006 LAND USE APPLICATION
Applicant Information
Applicant: I!r! t5o'j/z. /lJ
Ie/pi? --
Add ress. /btPO I. /It I> ():;-)-. <il1/! '1 73L"VD.-
Telephone No. /6/- 105(;7- 77<;;'S Other: 6'57- 6s~-- 272-9
Fax No.: {:/.c;(-:iP.:;:~-_cj2J:?o __.__~_
----~-~_.~------"
Email Address <.j b..'v hn MC:/ .e>.hu /7,.-,4...1, ( d ,~
Property Information
Property Owner !Jr '&'f/J e. .Bu v ,11 /n
__.__~_.__ ___n__..__n_____.__..____
Owner Address /60,' Ldk", ...j:;,;;,~;Crt.hC g~ vi?,
. Address of Property Involved:
Legal Description j." 1-:5 t2/~7 r'1P;.;t-/V )/-1' Ii> q",4'
(~+- I f5t/:::. / I t/ e c 1:..5> M?7/k,yJ
Property ID No.. J ..
7'-/2 ./....~_-2:/7 OOl.f"O
....2_'-C. -M_ L# ~-"'..:;..-<-- - L.;> _____ _ __ ----~-~----
Current Zoning: z-/
Type of Use: Iz:-<;, De-vi"" /
Property Acreage. Z-sB. fz-
(Jpe of Request' 'Applicants are responsible for
reimbursement of consultant
Apportionment of Assessments ($30) fees associated with filing,
o Comprehensive Plan Amendment ($300)
reviewing, and processing of
o Final Plat (including in Preliminary Plat) this application. Such fees are to
o Minor Subdivision (lot split/consolidation) ($300) be paid in escrow up front or
o Planned Unit Development ($600 + escrow) upon receipt of statement from
~reliminary Plat ($400 + $25 per lot + escrow) the City of Arden Hills. Fees
o Rezoning ($300) include costs for consultants
retained by the City and include
o Site Plan Review ($400) consultant planning services,
o Site Plan Review (Sign Code) ($250) attorney, and engineer.
o Special Use Permit or Amended Special Use Permit ($300) Payment of park dedication
o Vacation of Easement or Right.of.Way ($250 + escrow) fees, established by City
Ordinance, are req u ired with
. o Variance (Zoning Ordinance) ($250) certain procedures.
o Zoning Ordinance Amendment ($300 + escrow)
Revised: 7.18.2006
Page I of4
,
,
Brief Descriplion of Request (please also include a typed, detailed letter explaininQ the proiect):
-.----.--.-. .
/JrJ jJ<y4;- Po! /1 -e.. f'" 1')1. Gf I /;'/'<: I, tJf?C& h
COAJi/i7/, + Lv-f.::, j 7_ 4 .3 /hZiJc/J I-h 115 .rd 2 {oh
/ ,
q m;{ tuJ /, g{IL l luej .k:-:'> fp I Lvi, -.---...-
. f
----.-.--'-.-
Filinq & Information Requirements
The City requests that you make a pre.application meeting with the City Planner to discuss the
application process, requirements, and deadlines. Please see the attached checklist for information
submittal requirements Unless waived by the City Planner or Planning Commission, a certified survey of
the property is required for all applications.
Complete/Incomplete Applications
An incomplete applrcation will delay the processing of land use requests. The application approval time .
commences and an applrcation is considered officially filed when the City Planner has received and
examined the application and determined that the application is complete. A decision on whether the
application is complete or incomplete shall be made within fifteen (15) days following the submittal of the
application. When the applrcation is deemed to be "complete" it shall be placed on the agenda of the first
possible Plannrng Commission meeting occurring at least thirty (30) days from the date of official
submission of the applicalion.
Payment of Fees
The undersigned acknowledges that she/he understands that before this request can be considered, all
required information and fees (including all deposits) must be paid to the City in advance If additional
fees are required to cover costs incurred by the City, the City Planner has the right to require additional
payment from one or more of the undersigned, who shall be jointly liable for such fees. Such expenses
may include (but are not limited to) direct city payroll and overhead costs, fees paid to consultants and
other professionals, and the cost of printing, mailing, and supplies. The City may w~hhold final action on
a land use application, withhold building permits, and/or rescind prior action until all miscellaneous fees
have been paid. Applicants are advised that an escrow deposit is required at the time of the submittal of
the land Use Application to offset costs associated with the proposed project.
Notice of Meetinq Attendance
In order for the Planning Commission and the City Council to consider any applicalion, the applicant or a
designated representative must be present at the scheduled meeting. If not, the matter may be tabled
until the next available agenda.
.
Revised: 7.18.2006
Page 2 of 4
I,
Aq~nda Deadline and ~etinq Selleduie
The deadline for subminal of land Us.? 3pplicahons h; reQuilli.'d according to fhe schedule outlined below,
Thew arp no 2J(t~ptiOr'ls.. AI' Pbnning Commission meehngs are typically held on the fits! V'Vcdnesoay of
. each lTIonth 31 7:00 PM. Cily Councif rneetin~s a'e heEd lypically tha last Mond.ay of the same monlh at
7:00 PM. Meetings Ne: held io the Councir Chambers ill the City of Arden Hills, ~245 Wesi HighwaV 96.
AfDPn t-lills-. Mil'H'lesota ~5112, unle~~ o1herwlse statect Applicants ar~ advie;e-d l~t .additiorn:J( meeting$
and/or work::::.hops are scheduled when necessaty upOn clpproval of the Pla.nning Commission.
2006 SCHEDULE ('subrect ro change)
I .--.-... - ----l
TENTATIVE TEWTATIV/O
PLAN WING CITY COUNCIL
COMMISSION MEETING
APPLlcA TfON MEETING' DATE"
DEADLINE iGenelally held 00 ahe (Generallv OeJcI on the
DATE' 1" Wedr.2wav ::It 7:00 ;:).r.')) 1tI$~ MCOOz'lst 7:00 p,m.} __.~;
__ __ ~_~~~~f 5 !2Q..~~J ... Ja!1~'1-.1.. . . _. J~J)ua(y '30 I
-. J.muary 3 Foorualrv 1 Fcbrvarv 27
Februarv G ----.._. March 1 ~~~~ 2~t_. ----~-- ',-..1
___ ______v_ _P;4_arcf, 6 _.n .~p.ri.I~___
AmH3 .. M"Y3 Mey 2~ I
-_.. MaV 1 June 7 ---- -'\)0e-26
. ..["1);5--- -.
~. June: 5 July 31
July 3 __.___, August ~. AlJQus1 28
-... AugU5t 7 .~~Rt~~I?~-2_____ n... ~ S~p'lenlLe( 25
. Sep~@mber S Cc:obef 4 Octobgr :m
October 2" .--- ....,., ~--. Novf":Tlber1 .----- November 27 I
---. - -- ----- --- ,--_. -'.~-DeceMb~(6 I
HQ"'emb~r .; . _0'- ... Oecember 11
~ccmbN 4 .....'.._. ...-- .}.""uary 29 (2007) I
I J3nuarv 3 12007l
Acknowlcdq"ment and Siqnatme
. I acknowk!d~ thai J have read all of the information ljsted ill the City of ArdeJ' Hills Land iJs\!' Application
.and tully unders' net char I am responsible for al! c:ost~ incurred by the City related to Ihe pfoces'Sing of
lhts appl" 10
.~l.A__ ___.n.._~___ Z ~~dL2-
Property Owne, Sign~urc ~R~q~ii;:;:d) Date
-'-'-~ -'- ..
Apphcant Signature (If different than the property owner) Date
Please contad the City Planner;;il (651} 634-5134 OJ by €maif at iames.ll?hl1hoff(md;::udcll-hills,mfl.us If
you have 3rlY questions regarding thIS application
ArjrjitfOfl.:J1 l.'Vpics 01 this fJP(Jlic.1l1on form Jre- all~il3bJf). orl (he Ci(v's webs,t~
hrl(:rllwwwc.i ard~n,hifrs.mn.!lS
Revj~d: 7-] 8-2Co6
Fu~r..: 3 0".1
.
,
Please provide all of the Information in the checklist with your completed application. To seek a waiver of
any item, please contact the City Planner. .
Project Checklist
cr' Incolnnlete
Coniolete NIA .. , , ,..
, ,/ . Reouired Proiect Information: , ,. , ,.~ ,. " ' .
e./ L.J , Name of Project
~ .
LI Location of project and assigned site address
,IV' ~ .
i! Name and address of property owner & developer
e-.. --~-
Ll.}' '1 Signature of propertyown"r,~.develc)per
....--
ill/' J Legal Description
,I(' 'j - ~'-'-~-
'--. ParcellD
~ 'j ~- ----
:J Fifty (50) copies of a separ"f<!.s.!at"l11ent describing the proposal
u..-F :J , Fee
'.f ~..-~_.~-
,I No outstanding violations
[-1 i1 ,., Photograph(s) showing the location of the proposed project
,/ Mailing labels for all properties within 350' of the application property,
. which can be obtained from Ramsey County or online at http://maps.melro.
inet. us/RamseyCoGI S/Dlscla imerRC Public. htm
.> . i.,' '" .." ., Minimum Site Plan Information c ., .., . '
;;( iJ . Size of parcel and dimensions__.
./ j All eXisting structures, their square footage, dimensions, height, distance
,J from the property lines and setbacks (including right-of.way, and lake)
IV All proposed structures, their square footage, dimensions, height. distance
from the property lines and setbacks (including right-af.way, and lake)
1----.. ...... .,- .
ar LJ ,- Existing and proposed square footage and dimensions of driveways, roads,
parking, sidewalks, patios, and decks
: -_.~
I CO! Calculation of total bUilding coverage
'---- . ,
0 :I Calculation of impervious/hard surface coverage
_.!V i ,j Fifty (SOj 11"x17", three hoie punched, Z~foided copies
I ..
Iv rj Fences and retaining walls
., .,
C ,,'. , .. " Survey': ' . . ,.
. .--...,.
In addition to the information required for a site plan, the certified survey must
-. also include the following:
. --
W' I Boundary lines of project site including dimensions at a scale of not less
than (1) inch to fifty (50) feet. (Iron monument must be shown if located)
[9/ L' Existing and proposed topographic information at two (2) foot intervals
extending 100 feet from the exterior boundary. ..----
y L-J IJ Adjacent streets. rights.of.way, and easements
e/J'" _ ______._, U _.n___,___p
[l ! Shoreland boundary (including official OHW elevation)
.r Wetland boundary _____w_n__
I ..
r'r' .
LI " Name of surveyor, date, license number, scale, and north arrow
rn7 ..
LJ r-, Five (5) large scale copies folded into sets no larger than 8 1/2" x 14"
;:'.,"'."'., ""., .., ,'. ... ,.',.. Otlier Considerations": . ,. .....
C] U [I Landscapinq plan
. ---- --- ----~
IJ IJ [: Drainage/storm",ater management plan
.. ..'-..-
[J -J Siqns
...
c iJ Other plans, as appropriate to request.
'-'
'lJl1!eS~Wai\t~(ibymeCitYJ'>lanneror PI~nning Commissipn,a certified survey is required. . .
.
~'Please QQntacttMCitll Planner to determine ifotherolans will be reouired. .
Revised: 7.18.2006
Page 4 of 4
.
Attachment 3 B-2
City Engineer Review
.
. September 6, 2006, Planning Commission Meeting
. ~
~ EN HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 28, 2006
TO: James Lchnhoff, City Planner
FROM: Kristine Giga, Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: Planning Case #06-026: Boutin Minor Subdivision
The following are conunents based upon a review of the plans dated August 1,2006:
General/overall site design
0 The developer will be responsible for obtaining all necessary permits, which may include, but are not
limited to, Ramsey County, NPDES and Rice Creek Watershed District.
. 0 Please include a benchmark on all plan sheets.
0 The plan sheet must be signed by a registered engineer.
0 A permit will be required from Ramsey County for work within the right-of-way.
0 Any street patching on Lake Johanna Boulevard will be per Ramsey County requirements.
Sheet GI
0 Correct the NWL for Lake Johanna (876.5, not 976.5)
0 Please identify the significance of the elevation 877.61. Is this the water level at the time of survey?
Ordinary high water level?
0 The proposed elevation of the building on Lot 2 should be a minimum of two feet above the 100-year
flood elevation, which, for the proposed pond west of the proposed building on Lot 2, is 881.65.
0 Please show the location of silt fence.
0 Please correct the typographical error in the SWPPP text to read "RCWD" instead of "CCWD".
Sheet Ul
0 Please provide sanitary sewer service invert elevations at the wye.
.
\\Metro-inct.us\ardenhills\PR&PW\Engineenng\1006\Planlling Cases\06-026 _ Boutin.doc
.
Attachment 3B-3
Rice Creek Watershed District
Application
.
. September 6, 2006, Planning Commission Meeting
.
Attachment 3B-4
Air Photo Map and
Photographs of the Site
.
. September 6, 2006, Planning Commission Meeting
j;:
0
,
~ @.
, ~ .
uH ;g:li
]I! ;; ..~ ,,~
~"u~~" ~ liq '<
I ~H~~U~Hq
I III^ :i: '-" ,,? "
._ ~\\dill 0 ~ ~ "
s
'"
c
"
.
h
.s
8
h
<8
't:l
~
~
c<:
=
=
c<: g.
-=
0 ::s
a5 '-
~
--.J
G:::: .' I~
','" !"
.-, .~ "
.-~ ~
W '"
Vi
PO
U
~
0
'"
~ <
"
c
, "
8 ^ .
- ~ E
:tl ~ .~
~5~ . ~
~.f1i <~ ."
".- ~ ",~,il lil V'J 1% <\)
o.u~;<; ~ ~z OJ
g ~~~"'tJei~li\ b
5i~3:J~ii)2~-g,~ 0
L,il.s!ll8~~tilo..IVi u
~~\D ." ~
C 0
d 0
C N
o .
._ ,00
~~:c
E6<(
"^
~ ~ Oi
.~ 0 +-'
"j8'-t5
"'2;:1~
o p._~
u"~
o u c
..:~.,g
o ~'v;
l3'"t ~
.~ ..... '0
~.... ~
~<2~
8 '"CI.~
o ~ l::
u " "
doE
.~.D E
0..8 0
.."
E~,2
.~ ~ '0
~ ~g
.. N
~ gg~
"""-- 0..1::: ;:I
... ..
~ ro~;:I
"""" "'0 e<
~ :l,)C\l__
>> ~]~
~ .::: ~""-.::I
= ~ o~~
= ;j ;~ C
~ 0' ~ b'h~
..... >. ~ ~
~ V ~~
o > .- 0 0
_ ~ eo
r~ ~ g....
QJ ifJ :"0
~ 0 ~]~
_ ~ CIlOV
"".... ~ >,,....., u
., 0 0""
~ ,i::<';l
Z ;:I ~
o ; 81::
Q ....::::5
~ g~u
~ g.~~
E"'~
'0<20
v." 0
"'2 i::N
o. .
~o~
....t;j'"
~t:j;:l
~ .0
~€~
~" 0
~ 8 2
]iS~
:'i:5'Q 8
~ ::J e
.~. .~.g~
· ..... '.." E~:;
......-.,....."~... '.Ce-.' .' "'._.J::
',..;fj ::~$ .<r,"..',~,'"..;,,, ~] I-
~. .'n." , . ,.. .."~
~-'I,~_g" .~_.'; \;..' ~ .2 g
r"'L.. _",.o",~~.". -F " ~ S N
':'~,.:{J,"~.~:':"~?, ~- ~ . J ~ -a ~
;"i'i4'3"~,,).l:,-.'_"~: d ;:I
~ 0
Ci <
c
o
o
U
>
"
E
.
'"
...,.,
'.' ":':-" . ..
'v\-
~
-
..c:
Ol .
-;;:
~
(")
- -0
0 e
e ro
0 ~
:;:> ;t=
ro <1)
0 =
0 N
'- (/)
ro ro -
<1) <1) 0
e '- ..J
ro
-0_ e
e e <1)
ro <1) <1)
- E ~
e_
<1) ro <1)
E ~ .0
<1)- <1)
(/) '- e
ro <1) -
<1)- Ol !
ro
.c~ .S
= E -0
:.j:j ~ :~
::J 0
>>- -0
- (/) <1)
u.c -
ro
Oli:3 E
.S <1) 'x
t) '- 0
._ ::J '-
x- 0.
w.2 0.
~
(") .
-
0
..J
~ e
0
(/) .S
-
0 ro
..J E
1:' <1)
ro '-
~ -3'
0
-
-0 -
ro
> ..c:
aJ -
<1)
ro E
e
e 0
ro ..c:
..c: Ol
0 e
-, :;:>
<1) (/)
"'"' 'x
ro <1)
..J 1:'
Ol
e ro
0 ~
ro 0
-
. - -
. (/) (/)
ro <1)
-x'-" " <1) ~
:<:' ,,1 Ol Ol
" . ,.u e . e
. ,~, ",,", - :2'" :;z .
>':..:, 0-0 0
o e 0
..Jro ..J
.
.
Attachment 3B-S
Survey & Site Plans
.
. September 6, 2006, Planning Commission Meeting
e e e
~~~I ~ ~ q ~ q I ~ ~ ~ · I ~:~S' I I ~;~ji~~~i~~ ~ ~
;i1i ~ ~i~ ; i~m ~~ I ~ ~ ~Hi al~;i:~~~~~~ ~
MJ " _. ~ i ~ ~!l ~ B I ~ I ~ ~ ~~! ~ ~~~~ij~~I~~~ i
;:11 I .1 ~ ~ '< · r;! I ~ ~if ~ i~;~~a~h~~ '"
I ~~ : " ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ OJ ~ S' ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~
il;i : _ ~ ~ ~tl ~ <S ~ ~ ~:::~~~~~d~ ~
~ ~ f-, I "::I ~.. ~ ~ ~~~~~~_~~~~ ~
w~: ; ~ ~ l': :~ ~ II :!l~~~f~~--
h ;< ;<;< ~)i ::1;< ~ U~~~~I~;~
~~~~ ~~~~~ ~ ~~~~~~ ~~~
~~~~ ~~"P "~s."s~O .
~ ~. .~"" 8 Jilo-~.~S- ~
~I~I ~R:'~ ~ a~.a~~~~~~
~I;;r>]~ Cl~~~~ .~ f" ~t;~~~~~~
~~~~ ~~~~~ ~ ~~~~~~~;~~'<
~ n~ ~~ ~ ~~~i~ ,,~~~
~ ' ~~. ~ ~~ ~ ~~lj.
112.~ ~ . ~~ ~~"ffl
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
.J>
~9i~~~
!. \ ~~~~~
;; \ ~rrir'''~
\... \ ~",:t.C)~
\ -~. \ r- b-:t.:to. h)
\ '. \ V)~sa!f!~
\ ~ \ ~ ~~~
\ ~ \ 22~
\ '1 \
\ ~ \
\ r \
\ %. \
\ , \
\ ',\
\ -",
,i.'Z(,\ \ ~ , ___--
.............; _------EXISnNG EASEMENT L/NE~_n_-------._.
~ /\ J "
"'I. J.. ______________ "
------------ -\ I:
, '
I : ~
, .
\ ~...' I j \
r... \
~.. \ I
. '" \ I
H8 . \ '" W-
It ;: \ ..r--......... I ~
~Jfri~. ~ \y \ j...-EA5EMmrUNE". ·
~~ . . 'i ~~ " ~ 0; ~ ~
\ --, ~~.~
f. t't1 ~J: 'f--1..----- ---L, ~.~t
w Z \ h I I \ ~~~~
a~ '::r:>> ~~o,. H ii\ \~.; ~ .tf'\ I j '\ " ~~:~
~!a ~ ~~!af; ~~~ ~ 1\ '-'~ \ ~ ~8
llb r< ~~.'l:;~" '" \ \ I I \ ~ ~.
"l CJ') ~~~~ C:l I 1 I \ \,.... ;;:;
1IlV)f!lt;l \ \ \1..1
I C) ~~~~ "--1-.,, : I \ \
i ~ ~ ~ L-t _ "
!;Q ~ \ -- \
, 2~r ~ --~
~ n~~ \ "4' --- "
~I~ ~ ~s~~ ,ry _::"UEA5EMENrUNE.L.., ~ "-..--'"
~ i ~ ~s~~ ; -~-----~-L-45.! \ \
;, -< ~~~ ~- ~ I 8"--------~\ \
.S... .~ It i'; - ~
~I" II \ ~ \ ~
~ - 9. \
~ i-:;r;;,--_ \ \~.
\ ""''''' ---t \
"" ----
~ . \ I -------~ '
-_____ <.11 \ ~
II 21... ,
i' 81~ ~,
:b ~~o" 'F_ ~
~ ;c.. ;lJ :1,..:..... ___
~ t)<::::o ~ j - ___
'Sl :::s ~~.~~ . ~~~~~ -- - __ '
.1: "1 ~~'t : ~~~~o ~
!"I"\ r- f;;2 . <:~MI"I1~ -___
;- __.., If) ~~ ! 3:;i3:.c::t::) , -_____
I: _ '....,'.'!:: ,~ <:~ _" f ;::~J:).~ ~t:~t:J:': ----..
1/-~;::'--'-~:.....:....~.hO....'..... /~ ~" ~~~~2::; ~~~V)t ~~~~~
1""'5' ~I'" l.<!, _-I"'! ,....}\~\::l:i;<;) t::lQ:j<C:}:l
, ",,',t'h:" f '-t f;;:; i Uf~ ,....~ ,~ ~~'!l.
.i:J " '] it t:Jf'o.j ! ;x:~:t.~~ ::r:.
SQ ;:( j ! / +- il<:. ~ f::C')),.....t:l ~'; > ?J~ tI:I~
lis ' ia:~ ~ ~. V> ::::It:: ~ : N~,
. :s.~ . : ~ " . .~~n~" ' ~"~~'l:;
'Sf ;;i~.,) _ $ "" j <e~"'i"l2 ! :tL'llt)t::>""
11:1 g ... J / / f - a:(')~ ~ i::5i<:;l:.~
G; ~ - r -~...... lI) ~ ~
~ ! !;' ~ = ~~()~~
r.:s / < ~: ~ ~~~
! _ C) II:>
! ! il" " '~~ /
i1. lei.:' !I t s ~ '1 I ~~
" !j ~ ~ ~:l: ~ , -
), i! ~ ; I ~
Al)/~Ii ~~ ;;l::t: <:)
,\i",;I, Ih - ~ .. ~ " ~ -.;
r~ 'Ii'l ~ i ~ i n i: 8 ~+~
~ ~ -.
I! I I J ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ; ~ '"
() I"~ ~ s: ~HH~~ ~ I ~ ij
~ ~l~~f;1 ~ <j
. ~-
.... "'1:tJ (11
~
-.-----
e e
~.8~~~~1~~>~ ~ ~~~~~ '~~~~ ~~t ,~ "I~~ ~~~I- ' ~~ ~ ~" n " ~~~~~t " ~~~ ~~" . o~ ~ " > ~ ~~'~ ~~~'~~ ~~
!~ ~!~~~!~~~i~i ~ ~~~~i ~ "~~ ~j~ ~~ I ~~ ~~ ~ ~ i~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~i~~~ ; III ~~; ~ !~ ~ ~ ~ ~ li~~ 8jl:i~ ~~
iii~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~~~~~ l 1 ~~ ~~~i ~~~~~.... ~ ~ ,..., ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ H ~'~; H~ ~ ~ ~, ~o ~ , ~~
sa I~~~~~!~~~~~ ~ !~~:~ ~~. ~ :~~ ~ ~' ~~~~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~ '~ ~~ ~ ~~ I ~ ~ ~ ~;:. ~~~I~ ,
i i ~'~~'~~'~'~" ",~~, .~~i~ ."~ ~< ~!~~ ~~~ ~ ! ~~ ' ~' ~ ~ b."'~~ ~ ~,,~, ~ .~ . ~ ~ ~ .'s ".'~ >J
~ .~ '~,"~"~ >.~'~" ~ ~~ ~~"' " ~", ",~~,. M ~ M ~ "~~ ~ [. ~~' ~ ~,
~~ ~i~;l~i~~I~~ ~;~~~ I;j~~ ~~~ I; ~~!i ;~~ii ~ >; ~ ~i ~ ~ ~~~;~I; :~ i;1 I~ i ; ~. i!~ ~~;!~~!
~~
~~ I~~ n I ~~." .~ is < ~ ~' ~, ,~ ~""l ~ '" ,~b ~ ~ ~~ ~. ~ ' l ~. ~~~,,~ '
i;; ~ ~ ~i~~!~i~~~i !~~~ ~~:II :~i ~! ~!~~ :d~ ~ ~; I ; :I~i!~ ~ il ~il . i . ~ m ;~~~~ i
~~ 1111 ~ ~
~~ I ~ ~llt;:,:l! ~~;:l! ~i>l:f ~ ~~ ~:-iC;~ ~~~,... ~ 1'>.... :'( ~ ~ ~ 0 t:; f'i!i!t:;~~ ::li1
,5!~~ !S/l;""' ~'1 1::l~~ ~Pi~ ~ l>::;! ~iii ~ :t:~!i:lh",~ 'l:: \:j '" Sa1;l;! ~~r:; ..
m~~~s~~~~~~ ~.~ <t~~ '"~ ~ ~~<~ ~~~!" ~ ~ ~ ~,~~~. l~ <~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~~~~~ ~
~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "'.r~<~~"<' ~~~ ~'~~ p~ ~ ~~ '~~ iIi ~" ,~~~~ ,~'<" ~, ~. ~ ~
~~~~~~ti~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~i~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~f~ ~i~~ ~
~~~ p ~ "''tic-! "'~ :.-o"'! ~'"' ;;:n?;iF: '"' ~...<:: ~ 11 ~~ ~. --< ::;;:~ ::;t::; ~ ~~ !l::r:;
~flj~~~~~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ i;hl ~~~Jq i~ ~ ~ ~~~~~!il ~~ ~~ ~. ~~i ~~~~
~I~ ~)=:!~!2 ~;:!l'1'" ~J>~ril ~ ~ ~;;:J ~ (?iJ>:t>--< ::j 1q~ '6 ".. {)lI'['i~ j 1>1" ~... ~ 'll '11 ~1>l> '(
g~~ ~~g~~~~ ~~'(: ~~~~ ~~ ~ ~~;ij ~j~~ ~ ~ ~:~i~", ~~ ~~ ~ g~~ ~~ ~~
~~~~~~~~~~ I" f!l ~~ ~ ~~ ~: t~ ~ ~~!;!~1'l~ ~ \1 i ~ ~
.... ~ ~ ~ r- !=:i~ ti ~ ? ~
<, .~
'-'i'\
"~~ ~
[;;'a>"'Q"'~
!'i"'el:;!S1",
rr;~~ r..::
,.~~~~~
:;;I8-"',.(;j0l
n~ .. ()Cl\:J;lJ(;)d
6i<:8~S!'lJ
~'f ;j.. <:;t!J"'<:",8
",5!;j!::t,,=S!
I!' ~>> :ttrJ'"tlr=:(;):o
~~ C;OJ:J::
.....,:t -<:"""<
.,..0
.,..0
~~ ~ ~" --I)l
<:I"l
b~ t-< If:ln
, en CIl'
i I CIlI
.j>.'
. ,
d
/)
~ ~i~;
~ ~
~r~ ;:11
H==
.1 ..
~I : .~
0
'"
..
...
U
i' ~
-
2~ \,~;
~I ~
[I.l.~ <,
flit CIlCll-
fl1i (()(()CIl
NIJ1 '
, . (J
IJ1C1l"i::
I I lJ
J In<:
:::;:"l /
! ! ~l'i ~~
-
I ~t! III ~
,,,. .11 ~ 0
;7,,,,,' ~ ' . ~
.~ ~,'" II, ~~ ~2 ,,+~
,'lI"'" 111,1 ~"
",p",' i,l ,
~fIl --
r'~ !iil q<;
...
II ,
'i~
p III n~ ~ ~ ~ '"
~ ~ ~ ~ i:;j
G') iT! iTl ill iil i>l i>l i>l "
~~~~~~~ '"
...,,-:, ! ; I ~ ~ Ifi
.
, ~
~
e e
TO~ ~ -'=tJ
a ~~ tb '" ~ <::- PROPERTY,LI~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "'~~ is <<:::.::I~
S'~~' " II fll
~'<:l !a
" ..., z ~ S'o ~g' , "~. II 0:;. Ii CtI :S~
~ :::; Do !ij"':
'" Sd ~ <!li3'....(lQ ~~ ~ '"
i! ~ ~~~a; , ~ ".~
l1 ;s:: \ ~~ ~~~
c- ~ '" -< ;[}~! >"~
z ;e ~ ","I 0- \ <0 .Iii 7,~' MIN. ~Qg
~'~.2.1 g 1:!~ ';::13
t/) \ ~~
. ~s: ii ,
l\ <Il g ~
~3'!it '.. gC
. " ?
h~~
~ ~ ~ ~ "
(:<11 g'::,. 0
~c OJ ~ "
::;: .
~~c
, _0 )> "
~ q :!O.::I ..., ~
,"0 f'1
~ Cl..~~ ;0
l
~. Vl
f'1
;0 '"
,,;;
(')
f f'1
!
< ~ ".,
il'Do",,,, d- l'
",,,,:l' * 0 {
<0'" :l'
. :-j~ ~
~~::j Sj ;5 ;; ~
\ "'-~ ~ q >
~1;:; I / * "
\fiG ~ i z
Q
~ ~
Dol;;: ~
",llJ ~
:'--II * ~
<01
~"'"
"-1
I""" ,
~~.
i'i~~
~.J
. "~
// ~~
~-~ ~^,.. ---/ -T=---ExISnNG EASEMENT UNE~-----------~~" r
r::tj-------.--.--.--.--.--.--.- ' NVS i\ NVS
'- ___________L\_____________\
is::
ill \
iCtJ \
\"-.J ):.. \ \
:~ ,,// <
/~~~=............ -6 ,
\ ,
W. , ,
, ,
, ,
'II~ / , , ,
(' ""f~ a!;)JC::
ill \ ~~ ~\~ 11[1\ 2o~
~! ~ ():}iCX! f'\~:::j
lIi~ ~!"J ~~~
CoI . ,so 8",,,,
"-..I:\:) -p..i'-.j "'-<(
~~ b Dol ~~Q
~l
I S!-o:<
~ UJ _1::.-r-J
i i!J~'" <:1",
<:> ;:0 ." I'll/)
I ~ :t ,. I,
-' 8 ~ Coi
~ a !'1 Co'
.0.1
I~a < . \
~ ::t C)'
\ "" ,;
Ilg r-
~fn .::::.-".EASEME:NT UNE.L.., ..:-1' '" /
- .'
!l f"II ~. '"
~f : ". ----------I-J ~ II
-- ~ I
\ --- ------' I
0 \ I
..
n I I
'"
I I
1..1 - \ I
--- \
f 0_0 , ~
2~ ----s /
:::::----..... SAN~_ /
/
~i ~
[;;!..I.~ ~ TJ "==--
GAS ~~ SJw= -
~
r~ ====--- =---~
.~il
,
! ,
GAS ,
, !
f i
j,1 " ~lt'ii< I :'
R.O,"". :?:13;? i
I ~ ,f~ C)J D.Ji-"'"
Vl ~.~ II ill lO en jO::l_
~ Cl o~ eof(.G '" u, [(j'
:J .:r <c <..ole:) 111 Co:;;:
'" .<~
c @~@ ~:~ I l'lJ
! ! !il', , ,. -""'!lr1 l/)<:I
'< . .
Vl .~. - ",,"'I
I ~~~l (l> " . M ~ I
i,,, jl " ~ ~
(l> "g~ 0
, ~~6 " ~ ~
::0hl! -i~
rV'11! I Vl ~ .
~ ~
"ill"" ,'! (l> ~ ~
"~".. ''; -Iii ,
I'~i~ '!i!l < ~ ~ ~
o' B'"
(l> ~
:. ~
~ '1 _ '"
~ ~Ij~ ~ . ~ ~ M ~ ii
c: ..
. .~ "
HLH ~
-...\ i ~ I ~ ~
. ~ .
~
,
--.
I
e e iiliimim
z~
o.
~
~
t;
~ j:\Z -,
i !5~ 1 I
:I:!!l 1
~ gllli!! ~!" \ .. ,
::u~g z'" I. /1
,. 1 I
, ;;! ::l ;'1
~ Z ~ A;,.. \
/ l' 1
, 1
'I ',-,' f'
'-
o.oOmI:rZ"'tJ - ,I
1 I ~~~~~::o . - - - :
~~ ~ m E~ ~ ~ ...... III~ - I
go 1
II --g:ljl' 1
~. . I g~ ~~ ~OO I
'" m "',"O~Gl:l '. r-- 1
o ID ~ c...~ ~::Ur::l':<p1j ; r I
o :1 . -...I II\TlU. i', .A,-r-;' I I
m .
"_.... '" "lI / .. I 1
III 0 d~ ...~ ~ II U i .... .~..~ V," I
I'N .. 81 .<: /.. 1
~~ ~ -~ :it'" 81- O/Y ... , I 1
8 z i o ~m .,' ~ . /' /.'~-- )
S ~ ~ 0(11 01(,,1 ( ,'; I
~ (II"', _J' / _/ \ I
)/.' / .... 1 ~__'
t ..... /' \ I ~"'~/
!;C5!!i- " / ., C-"-"U
~l:l~d )( '/ . -', ~ 118 -- "
, ' '" --0'" -.-" I
~~~~~ .." t. Q16 1
,)' \\......~: f
;~bl \ / /__, \, ::::1....(1) I
~,~ - ~~lj~~: _J /
I ~ ~ii~~
~;d~~
~ ~ ~~I;I i!
~ I il~mm ' ; '... (')- ....,$!
~ ~~~ ; - "61
~ ~i'ii. 1
E>~~ __i-
ff ~21a
. ~!( ~ \
~~ \
- .
-
1:.:...
V;;r-
""
,-
<
. I
~;::
g~ I
.< I
.,
<"
~~ \
~~
,~
>~
~~ \
,
'"
'"
'"
~~
~ 'I'
I ......
I .....,..~/ I
" I
."'" 1')1 /:;:
~ ! "I,"') I
0 "'vi / Z. I
'" I I
"lIO I / ........ I
~~-i ~ I t.. )1
~I-< "I ..... I /'
.) / "
z::oO I / (~/
~oa-"
mC'l> I "" .,-: " I'
Z IT1 ~G ....../1.... "I)
,,>~::u
~zo 0 ...... /"~ /
OoJT1
"zZ . I V
~!!!I . I '~
$. I \~
oC'l_ ....
......ffir )( ~;;:,.
or ~\.
::o(/)
:I: >
0 . L
0 / /
0
~ 0
~ :/
~
z
0 '"
9 m
L 0
.
.
Attachment 3B-6
Preliminary Landscaping Plan for the
City Stormwater Management System
.
e September 6, 2006, Planning Commission Meeting
O'WT
ml. ...'"
006 4'55:35 PM, _
L.llyoul1, BI'2.1r2 .
T\837-1.S-oe.dwg,
A:\3180S63 HTlCONS
~~ , ,
~ a. / 1'/ ( )
l;f / I
(
0 1p"1~ 1/ / 1
> ) \
;; ; )
/ ~..
/ / /
~ # / (
::0 ' i
,
~ / /':><
d f,/ ~ /
/~t./ '/ /
/ /
I . ~ 1/1
, ~/ / ii
~ --- ,
- /' 0
_/ k >
.~ "
---
~ . -
---
I ---
/-
_/
~~ ~ ~ ~~ U - /
........ . '" ~
~ ~ ~....
8" ,
m
~n~
I z
~ ~ ~
~ .~~~~
' ~~~~,
~ 'Iii!
~ ~ ~~;
i i ~~~~i
~ 0 !;;~..
~ ~ ~~~~
~~1I~
~>
~ ~~u
VI ~~
L
li \-''---_._-",~
ii~"
. g ,
"::l~> I
!e~,,:;;~
";;~o~"
n~s:-<-<~
~"O.;>"''''
"Q~o",
n~~ig
~~
-
~
g
a>
~Q
,,=<
I
~ ~:!2 ~
00
" ~~)>
'" >~:;o
~ ~ 8 0
" rr1
~ ~ z
~ ~::r:
- G')_
:I:r
~r
;otn
:I: ~I S
8 1:1'1110
0
~ ----
(J1 q -
o ~
. ~
. ~HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 30, 2006 PC Agenda Item 4.A
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: James Lehnhoff, City Planner
SUBJECT: Clear-cutting Violation
34XX Lake Johanna Blvd
As you are likely aware, a property on the western side of Lake Johanna was clear-cut at the end
of July, which is in violation ofthe shoreland ordinance. The property does not have an assigned
addrcss, but it is located immediately south of3441 Lake Johanna Blvd on the western side of
Lake Johanna. Staff has been working with the property owner to resolve the situation to
produce a positive outcome for the City and the neighborhood. While it is a regrettable situation,
the propcrty owner has been very cooperative with the City.
. Mr. Ngo, the property owner, has volunteered to go through the Site Plan Review process to
rcview the proposcd landscaping plan for the property. Generally, a residential property is not
subject to a landscaping review. Staff has been working with Mr. Ngo to prepare a plan for the
site.
The official application will be submitted for the October Planning Commission meeting;
however, Mr. Ngo and his contractor have submitted a draft plat to get some feedback before the
plat is submitted for an offieial review. PI case review the background of the case and the
attached draft materials. Mr. Ngo and/or his representative do plan on attending the meeting.
Background: During the last part of July, the property owner of34XX Lake Johanna Blvd, Mr.
Hien Ngo, hired a tree cutting service to remove the trees from his property to prepare the site for
construction of a new home. Prior to the clearing, the property was vacant. The property owner
claims that hc contacted the City to find out if a permit was needed to remove trees. The City
does not require a permit for removing trees; therefore, it is quite possible that the property
owner was told he did not need a permit. Unfortunately, it was not made clear that this is a
property within the shore land overlay zone. Additionally, the tree cutting servicc also removed
the trecs in the Ramsey County right-of-way for Lake Johanna Blvd and may have removed trees
in the Fairview Avenue right-of-way, which is dedicated to the City.
City of Arden Hills
. Planning Commission Meetingfor September 6,2006
\\Metro-inet.us\ardcnhills\Planning\Planning Commission\New-Old Business\2006\083006 - Ngo Violation L:mdscaping Review.doc
Page 1 of 3
Ramsey County Violation: During my last conversation with Ramsey County, they determined .
that since thcre was no damage to the road and erosion was under control, they did not have .
any legal recourse. While Ramsey County indicated that they may investigate the situation
further, it appears that they have closed the ease. They did say that the Connty would support the
City's efforts to have the property re-Iandscaped.
Rice Creek Watershed District Violation: The Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD)
investigated the scene and found the erosion eontrol measures in place to be sufficient and,
therefore, they did not have any cause for action. RCWD does not have any restrictions on
vegetation removal. RCWD will be reviewing the property owner's building plans; however, at
this point, it is quite likely that RCWD will approve thc building plans.
City Violation: The technical violation of City Ordinances is clear.cutting in the Shoreland
Overlay Zone, which is prohibited in Ordinance 334 Subd. 7.A. I. Clear.cutting includes
completely removing a stand of trees and other vcgetation.
City Options: The City has not had a violation like this in anyone's recent memory, and there is
not a defined process in place for resolving this type of violation. Since the vegetation is already
gone, thc City must look for the option that provides the best outcome for the City and the
neighborhood. While the City could issuc a citation or file a civil lawsuit, we try to work with
thc property owner before taking the owner to court. Even if the property owner enters a guilty
plea, the court process can be long and expensive with minimal results. It is quite possible
that the City's Icgal eosts would be more than a fine, and the court may just order the property
owner to work with the City to re-Iandscape the lot. Furthermore, taking the issue to court may .
delay implementing a landscaping plan. In this case, the property owner has been cooperative
and open to Staff ideas. Should the property owner decide to not work with the City, we can
pursue legal options. Unfortunately, the City does not have an administrative eitation process at
this time, which means we cannot simply fine the property owner without taking him to court.
Property Owner Agreement: In a meeting with the property owner, Staff suggested that he
volunteer to have his landscaping plan reviewed through the site plan review process, which
would require review by the Planning Commission and City Couneil along with the $400 site
plan review fee. In most cases, a residential property would not be subject to the site plan review
process or a landscaping review. Mr. Ngo has volunteered to go through the site plan review
process and be subject to whatever conditions are placed on the landseaping plan. He was made
awarc that the City would be looking for an extensive landscaping plan that should include the
Ramsey County right-of.way (provided that the County is supportive of the new landscaping in
the right.of.way).
Since it is not practical to fully installlandseaping before the home is constructed, Mr. Ngo will
be submitting an escrow to the City for the estimated cost of the landscaping to ensurc that the
landscaping is completed prior to issuing any building pcrmits. Due to the timing and dcadline
dates for the Planning Commission, the site plan review will likely take place in October. The
City oj Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for September 6, 2006 .
\\Metro-inet.us\ardenhills\Planning\Planning Commisslon\New-Old Business\2006\083006 Ngo Violation Landscaping Review.doc
Page 2 of3
property owner is continually responsible for maintaining the crosion control subject to City and
RCWD standards.
. Publicly owned Land vs. Public Right.afway: Understandably, there has been a concern about
the trees removed from the right.of-way. Publicly owned land is not quite the same thing as
pubJie right-of-way. If somcone would remove trees from publiely owncd land, sueh as a City
park, it would be an entirely different tY]Je of violation that may involve trespassing, property
damage, ctc. However, public rights-of-way are dedicated to the City or County for particular
tY]Jcs of uses such as transportation, utilities, and drainage. While many people placc a valuc on
trees no matter where they arc locatcd, the trees in public rights-of-way do not always have a
monetary value that can be recouped if they are removed. In fact, the City prohibits people from
placing landscaping in the publie right.of.way in most circumstances. Therefore, the City and
the County would probably not have a basis for legal action on the trees that were removed from
the public right-of.way in this particular situation. Landscaping put in placc by thc City or
County is treated differently.
.
City ojArden Hills
. Planning Commission A1eetingfor September 6, 2006
\\Metro-inct_lIs\ardenhills\Planning\PJanning Commission\Ne\v-Old Hnsincss\2006\083006 Ngo Violation Landscaping Revie\v.doc
Page 3 of 3
S1. Croix Tree Service, Inc.
675 Grupe St., Roberts, WI 54023
. ,
.
August 11,2006
Moser Builders
Bob Moser
l/JOO Cty Rd. E Suite 220
Shoreview, MN 55126
Re: Ngo Property - Lake Johanna Blvd
Per your request, I am wTiting this letter to note the types of trees recently removed from
the Ngo property in Arden Hills, There was no tree survey provided, so I'll detail the
project to the best of my recollection. The vast majority of the trces removed from the
site were smaller (<8 inch diamcter) trees of speeics generally considered undesirable, .
such as buckthorn, boxelder, and black locust. The notable exceptions were 2 large
cottonwoods and 3 or 4 green ash approximately 15 inches in diameter. One of these
green ashes was uprooted and leaning into a cottonwood, a clear safety risk to the road
beneath. I hope this information helps, and please fcel free to contact me if you have any '\
further questions.
~~-
Chris Muehleck
ISA Certified j\rborist
.
MN (651) 770.3744 A WI (7t5) 749.3475
email: info@stcroixtreeservice.com t~i FAX (715) 749.3465
ii' ~
' .~~ .
J>X:,;-;. 1 8 12006 08: r) "': #5761 P.OOlfC03
. FAX TRANSMITTAL IDl EMMONS
& OllVI ER
RESOURCES
~ -
~ -
~r..,..'.''- ~._,c ,",op)'
651 Hale Avenue
Oakd<Jle, MN 55128
Phone: (651) 770-8448
Fax: (651) 770-2552
Date: August 18,2006 E-mail: ggraske@eorinc.com
To: Bf~~6f~ Fu:No: MSI- t/f.:l- I!f4D
~S1. :~lJ;/~ MDI
From: Greg Graske Total. Pages: 3
Subject: Rice Creek Watershed District Permit Application No. tJ& -08'S
Atl:2cbed is tbe Engineer's Report for your Rice Creek Watershed District Permit Application.
TIle recommended Board Action for your application is:
. . Conditional Approval Pending Rcceipt of Changes (CAPROC). This means that you
have 12 months from next Wednesday to submit the pcnding items listed below tbe
reeommendatiol1. District staff may approve the application and issue a permit within this
i 2-montll period without returning to another B03rd of Managers meeting. If this
information is not received and approved within 12 months, the application status reverts to a
Dcnial.
All additional. infOl1nation should be submitted to the Rice Creek District Office, Attn: Ken
Powell. Please note that aU submittals to satisfy pending items must indude 2 copies, For large
plan sheets, one copy must be a. reduced size (l] x17 or smaller) or an electtonic file (.pdf or .jpg
format).
Feel free to call me at 651-770-8448 wi.lh any questions.
Emmons & Olivier Resources, rnc,
District Engineers
. [X] Only copy you will receive, [ J Original follows by maiL
AlJG.18'?:::Of, 08:~_:j .:#~,761 P.OO2/003
Rice Creek Watershed District Permit Allplication Number 06-085 .
Applieant: Bob Moser Consultant: Charles Plowe
Moser Homes Plowe Engineering, Inc.
1000 COUIJ.ty Road E 6776 Lake Drive NE, Suite] 10
Suite 200 Lino Lakes, MN 55014
Shoreview, MN 55126 Ph: 651-361-8210
Ph: 651-483-5132 Fx: 651-361-8701
Fx: 65)-482-1860 chuck@plowe.eom
Purpose: final Site Drainage Plan for a single-fomily home ripurian to Lake
Johol1no, 2,91 O"e SF, O.4do acres.
Location: 600::1: LF south of County Road E and west of Lake Johanna Boulevard.
Arden Hills.
T-R.S: 30-23-33 ach
District Rule: C & D
Recommendation: Conditional approval pending receipt of changes and outstanding
items related to:
Stonnwater Management .
1. Geotechnical soil borings conducted as part of this project to
deterrnine depth to water lable and substrate materials.
2. Incorporation of infIltr3tion BMPs (e.g. depressional storage,
rain garden, infiltration swales, etc.).
Administrative
3. . Draft legal document with satisfoctory form and description
granting ponding and tlowagc easements over all onsite ponds,
wetlands, and other hydrologic features.
4. Draft Declaration for Maintenance of Storrnwater Management
facilities acceptable to District engineer and attomey for
proposed onsite storrnwater management features.
5, Copy of receipt from County Recorder and signed/notarized
legal document(s). Note that legal document{s) are to be
submitted by Applicant to County for recording only after
approval hy District. .
Emmons & Olivier Resources, Inc. - t . 811 8/06
A~G.:8'2006 08:58 #5761 P.OO3/Ci03
, Permit Application No. 06-085 Moser Homes
. 6. Cash snrety in the amount of$500.
Exhibits: l. Permit Application dated August 3, 2006, rcceived August 3, 2006.
2. Preliminary Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan prcpared
by Plowe Engineering, Inc., dated August 3, 2006, received August
3, 2006.
Findings: L The proposed project entails construction of a single family home on
a Jot riparian to Lake Johanna,
2. Incorporation of infiltration practices is required to provide treatment
of nm.off from impervious area.s prior to discharge to La.ke Johanna.
3. District staff has field verified that there Ere no onsite wetlands,
4. The lOa-year flood elevation for Lake Jol1lli1na is 897.6. Thc
proposed lowest floor is 907.3 thereby satisfying District freeboard
requirements.
5. The required set back from Lake Johanna is 50 feet. TIle proposed
. building is approximately 150,,: teet from the OHW of Lake Johanna
(878.0), thereby satisfying DNR setback requirement.s.
6. An acceptable erosion control plan including silt. fence downslope of
disturbed areas and revegetat.ion specifications has been submitted,
Board Action:
.
Emmons & Olivier Resources, Inc, -2- 8/18/1)6
. ~.
~
< '"
"
(") ..
'"
-<
..
. C1
;;; J>
'" ^'
J>
C1
_ fTl
"
Z t
Q ~~
D r~
...,.., /il:"
/v '" .
~ "x
'" ~ ~~
g b
~ ~
z
n
r>l
t:!
fTl
~ R
~::ll
F~
/il'
"'~
"x
~'"
r~
'"
~ ;u"":
~" ,.
~ !Z i!l'i
. ~ <
~~ ~ ~i!l
x w ~ ~~
~... q Z W Fiji'IJ
~l'i _ "',. !i! ",I;;
W '" ..
'" ~
II $
,.
ZW
- ,
-<
"11,
~~
!;J
'"
- ..
- '"
"
Z
'"
~
'"
- ~
'"
::: CO ~
. ~ 8 ~
,. '- '-
i'l
'" 3~~\
~NN~\-\Or
G./\ \8.
~~q~~~~8~~~~~!~~~~~~~~~S
~ ~ > > - - ~ ~ z ~ ~ z x ~ ! M ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
i
i
~~~~~~i~"'i~~S~~~i~~~~~J~S
~S:02,,:;~ ~ :l!t+~.n~~3~Stgn""<~
~"3\1'l- ;5~~ ~-l~ ....z~~o
V'I ..,0 ~"'l~"'l0'1 n En i "'I'l:!L s.";:I
~~.~;;<o ,,~":+~.j~ ir['~~:l!z
.,11' "'tOn~~~~:I>::s "O~ ::r f -~
g~~~~!!~~~~~f~'~~~~~'~~~
~'<f~ s:~~~~~I~~g.~~.fj~ lp
~ "J g..o~ "OS;" g
~ ~p ~~" ~
"'l ~ ~ "'l ~
, '" '"
. .
Ii ~
g t
. ~
'<
~
. ~HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 30, 2006 PC Agenda Item 4.B
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: James Lehnhoff, City Planner
SUBJECT: Boston Scientific Water Tower Sign age
With the recent acquisition of Guidant by Boston Scientific, they are looking at replacing the Guidant
signage with Boston Scientific signage. Based on a preliminary review of their wall and monument
sign proposal, no special permits will be needed because the new signage will not exceed the sign
area or dimensions of the old signage (a regular sign permit will still be required for each sign that is
visible from the public right-of-way or neighboring properties).
However, Boston Scientific is considering changing the dimensions and possibly the color of the
signage on their water tower. In October 2001, the City approved a sign variancc for Guidant to put
. their company name/logo on the water tower at their campus (PC# 01-25). When Planning Case 01-
25 was approved for the water tower signage, the following two eonditions were included:
1. The color of the letters On the water tower being painted black, and the tower being non.
illuminated.
2. The exterior appearance of the water tower being maintained.
If the new signage for the water tower is deemed significantly different from the signage approved in
PC# 01-25, a new site plan review for the signage maybe required. Staff is requesting the Planning
Commission to review the Boston Scientific proposal and determine if a new site plan review is
required or if the new signage is within the spirit of the previously approved sign variance. Should
Boston Scientific decide to submit a sign proposal that does not exceed the area and dimensions of
the existing water tower signage and meets the conditions of Planning Case 01.25, the Sign Code
would only require a sign permit for a replacement ofthe sign copy.
Boston Scientific will be bringing their water tower signage proposal to the meeting.
Procedural Note: Deviations from the recently approved sign regnlations follow the site plan review
process instead of the variance process, which was also the case in the previous sign regulations.
Planning Case 01-25 was approved under an even older sign ordinance that required a variance to
deviate from the sign standards. If dcemed necessary, the City would follow the site plan review
process for significant changes to the water tower signage.
City of Arden Hills
. Planning Commission Meetingfor September 6. 2006
\\M:etro-inet.us\ardenhills\Planning\Planning Commission\New-Old Business\2006\083006 - I30sScie water tower signage.doc
Page 1 of!
,
~
. ~HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 30, 2006 PC Agenda Item S.A
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Jamcs Lehnhoff, City Planner
SUBJECT: City Council Meeting Actions Regarding Planning Cases
Thc City Council held their regularly scheduled meeting on August 28th, 2006. At this meeting,
the City Council rcviewed the following four planning cases:
A. Planning Case 06-021; Minor Subdivision & Variance; Bruce & Kathy Haglund; 3300 &
3294 Lake Johanna Blvd
B. Planning Case 06-022; Site Plan Review; Greg Peterson; 1105 Amble Drive
C. Planning Case 06-024; Planned Unit Development Amendment & Site Plan Review;
. Boston Scientific; 4100 Hamline Avenue N
D. Planning Case 06.023; Master Planned Unit Development & Preliminary Plat; Royal
Oaks Realty, Inc; 1440 - 1450 West Highway 96
Plannin!!: Case 06-021: Variance & Minor Subdivision, Bruce & Kathv Ha!!:lund
The City Couneil accepted the Planning Commission's reeommendation for approval and
unanimously voted to approve Planning Case 06-021 for the variance and minor subdivision at
3300 and 3294 Lake Johanna Blvd. The approval is subjcct to the five conditions recommended
by the Planning Commission.
Plannin!!: Case 06-022: Site Plan Review. Gre!!: Peterson
The City Couneil accepted the Planning Commission's recommendation for approval and
unanimously voted to approve Planning Case 06-022 to construct a six foot high fence in the
front yard setback of Lexington A venue at 1105 Amble Drive. The approval is subjeet to the
scven conditions recommended by the Planning Commission.
City of Arden Hills
. Planning Commission Meetingfor September 6, 2006
\\Metro-inet.us\ardenhills\Planning\Planning Commission\CC Reports\083006 - PC report - CC report.doc
Page I of5
,
"
Plannin!! Case 06-024: Special Use Permit & Site Plan Review, Boston Scientific
The City Council accepted the Planning Commission's recommendation for approval and .
unanimously voted to approve Planning Case 06.024 from Boston Scientific to construct a
10,225 square foot addition to building N. The approval is subject to the thirteen conditions
recommended by the Planning Commission.
Plannin!! Case 06-023: Planned Unit Development & Preliminary Plat, Royal Oaks Realty
The City Council accepted the Planning Commission's recommendation for approval and voted
4.0 (Councilmember Holden was absent) to approvc Planning Case 06.023 from Royal Oaks
Realty for the redevelopment of the former City Hall property. The approval is subject to the
following thirty.seven conditions:
I. Final Plat. The applicant shall submit an application for a Final Plat within six (6)
months following City Council approval ofthe PUD and Preliminary Plat.
2. PUD Permit. A Planned Unit Development Permit shall be drafted by the City Attorney
and be subjcct to approval by the City Council prior to the issuance of a Building Permit.
3. Revised Plans. The applicant shall submit revised plans that are in conformance with the .
plan review comments from the City Engineer Fire Marshal, the Building Official prior to
approving the Final Plat, and any other applicable conditions.
4. Timeline. The applicant's timeline for development shall be as follows:
a. Phase I: Fall 2006 . The developer may begin grading, installing utilities, and
construction of storm water improvements. .
b. Phase 2: FallfWinter 2006 - The developer may begin construction on units I - 9.
c. Phase 2: 2008: Project complcted.
Extensions beyond Deccmber 31, 2008, shall require an application and be subject to
City Council review and approval. At the time of application for extensions, thc City
Council may include such conditions of approval as they determine neccssary for
compliance with City Code.
5. Bylaws. The bylaws, covenants, deed restrictions, or any similar documents shall include
all of the restrictions included in the approved Planned Unit Development. Thcse
doeuments shall be subject to review by the City Attorney and shall be submitted prior to
filing the Final Plat.
6. Occupancv. No more than one business shall bc permitted to occupy anyone office
condominium within the development.
7. Uses. Retail, restaurant, fast-food, and residential uses shall not be pennitted to occupy
any of the units in the proposed development. Retail uses may be permitted if thcy are
incidental or accessory to the primary use.
8. Outside Stora!!e. Outside storage shall not be pcrmitted under any circumstances.
9. Landscapinl! Plan Revisions. The applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan for
review and approval by the City Planner prior to the issuance of building permits that
conforms to the following:
City afArden !Jills
Planning Commission l'vfeetingjor September 6,2006 .
\\Metro-incLus\ardenhills\Planntng\Planning Commission\CC Reports\083006 PC report - CC report.doc
Page 2 of 5
--
.
a. Additional conifcrous trccs shall be provided along the west buffer yard of the
development to increase screening for the trail and residential properties.
. b. At least 30 percent of the trees shall be in the 3.5" to 4" caliper range and 20
perccnt of the trees are in the 4.5" to 5" caliper range. The numbcr of trees in the
2" to 3" caliper rangc shall not bc more than 50 percent of the trees in the
landscaping plan.
c. The Nortbwood Red Maple and the Honey Locust to thc southeast of unit #16
shall be supplemented with coniferous trees and/or other vegetation to reduce
headlight glare from southbound traffic.
d. Thc office condominium assoeiation shall be responsible for maintaining the
landscaping indefinitely. Diseased or dead landscaping shall be replaced within
six months. Significant changes to the landscaping plan, as detennined by the
City Planner, shall require Planning Commission approval.
e. The landscaping shall be irrigated.
f. The applicant shall be rcsponsible for rcplacing any damage to the landscaping on
neighboring properties.
10. Landscaoinl! in the Ril!bt-of-wav. The applieant shall be responsible for maintaining
the landscaping in the Highway 96 right-of. way. The City shall be provided with a copy
of the letter ofpennission for the landscaping in the Highway 96 right.of-way. If the
applicant is unablc to obtain permission from Ramsey County to landscape a portion of
the Highway 96 right.of-way, the applicant shall submit a rcvised landscaping plan that
mccts the City's landscape plan requirement within the boundaries of the property.
11. Landscaoinl! Bond. The applicant shall submit a performance bond or other surety
acceptable to the City Attorney for all landscaping or screening in the amount of 125
. percent of thc cost of the materials and installation. The bond shall bc provided prior to
the issuance of any building pennits.
12. Screellinl!. If the landscaping does not provide at least 60 percent eoverage as viewed
from neighboring residential properties, as detennined by the City Planner, the City may
rcquire addilional landscaping.
13. Dust and Noise. The applicant shall make reasonable efforts to reduce dust and noise
during constlUction.
14. Construction Activities. The applicant shall comply with Scction 630.01 of the City
Code limiting constlUction times to between 7:00 am and 9:00 pm on weekdays and 8:00
am and 9:00 pm on weekends and holidays. However, the City shall reserve the right to
further limit times in which constlUction may occur if a compliant is received and the
complaint is verified to be a nuisance by the City.
15. Dumpster Enclosures. The dumpster cnclosures shall use Hardie Plank siding that
matches the siding of the office buildings in place of the proposed stucco.
16. Tree Preservation. The applicant and their contractors shall work with the City Planner
and City Forestcr to save as many existing, healthy, and well placed trees as possible in
the areas designated as landscape space.
17. Mechanical Screeninl!. All mechanical operating equipment shall be screened to meet
City regulations. Meehanical equipment shall not be visible from the neighboring
residcntial areas or the daycare.
City of Arden Hills
. Planning Commission Meetingfor September 6,2006
\\J\1etro-ineLlIs\ardenhills\Planning\Planning Commis.sion\CC Reports\083006 PC report - CC report.doc
Page 3 of 5
.
18. Fencing. Decorative fencing shall be erected around the pond at the northeast corner of
the property to increase pedestrian safety. The fence shall require a pernlit and shall not .
exceed six fect in height.
19. Park Dedication. The applicant shall pay a park dedication fee of $40,000.00 prior to
filing the Final Plat with Ramsey County.
20. Rice Creek Watershed. The applicant shall obtain all nccessary permits from the Rice
Creek Watershcd District and Ramsey County prior to filing the Final Plat.
21. Highwav 96 Access. The Highway 96 access shall be right.in and right-out only. The
applicant shall be responsible for the signing and striping to provide a right turn lane on
eastbound Highway 96 to the development's driveway.
22. Hamline Avenue Access.
a. The Hamline A venue access shall be a right-in and right.out access only. No left
turns shall be permittcd.
b. To facilitate movement in and out ofthc dcvelopment, a minimum 30-foot radius
shall be built on the northwest and southwest corner of the Hamlinc Avenue
interseetion. Revised entrance plans shall be submitted to the City Engineer and
Ramsey County Engineer for approval prior to approving the Final Plat. Thc
applicant shall bc responsible for placing all necessary traffic signage.
23. Davcare Access. The applicant shall provide the daycare with a no-cost access easement
to allow vehicles to access the day care from the office park's access on Highway 96.
24. Stop Signs. A stop sign shall bc placed at the southbound cxit to the access easement
from the daycare per the recommendation of the 2005 traffic study. A stop sign shall also
be placed at the eastbound cxit to the access easement before the daycare exit/entrance to
the access easement per the recommendation of the 2005 traffic study.
25. Signs. The following shall apply to all signage in the development: .
a. Each unit shall be permitted one I O"x I 0' sign on the tront of the building
centercd above the entranee to the unit provided that these signs are uniform in
color and are not illuminated.
b. ]f any units are combined for use by one oecupant, the combined units shall be
considered one unit in terms of sign age and shall be permittcd one 12"xl0'sign
ecntered betwecn the combincd units provided that thc sign is in confonnance
with the other primary signs in the development as pcrmitted in condition 20.a.
c. ]funits 19-23 are combined into one unit, the combined units may have one
shared sign on the rear of the building provided that the sign is no greater than 60
square fcet, is centered on the building, is only used by the single occupant of the
combined units, and is not illuminated.
d. Each individual unit or combined units shall be permitted one sign that is 1.3' by
1.6' for address and business name adjaecnt to the door. The address and
business name shall bc uniform throughout the development in size, placement,
and color. These signs may be illuminatcd.
c. Each sign shall requirc a separate permit.
f. Off-premise advertising shall not be permitted under any circumstances.
g. SigIlage shall not be permitted on the awnings/canopies.
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meetingfor September 6, 2006 .
\\Metro-incl_us\ardenhills\Planning\Planning Commission\CC Reports\083006 PC report CC report.doc
Page 4 of5
.
26. Drainage & Utility Easement. The applieant shall provide a 12 foot drainage and utility
. easement along the exterior lot lines and the right-of-way.
27. Lighting Plan. The applicant shall amend the lighting to be in full compliance with the
City's lighting regulations prior to approving the Final Plat.
28. Sidewalks. The applicant shall submit revised site plaus that include sidewalk
connections to each building, where feasible, within the development and to the City and
County trail systems, The plan shall be submitted to the City Planner and City Engineer
for review and approval prior to the issuance of building pennits.
29. Trail. The trail along the western edge of the property shall be conveyed to the City in a
mamler that is acceptable to the City Attorney.
30. Easement Vacation. The twenty foot wide pedestrian easement near the center of the
property shall be vacated prior to filing the Final Plat.
31, Sprinkling. All of the units shall bc sprinkled for fire suppression.
32. Sand cushion. A one. foot sand eushion shall be added under any sidewalk provided in
the development.
33. Gutters and Downspouts. Gutters and downspouts appropriately located as approved
by the City Engineer shall be installed to carry roof stormwater direetly to the stonnwater
system.
34. Planting Bed Islands. The applicant shall provide sufficient space for landscaping in
two islands in the western parking lot and six islands in the central parking lot subject to
approval by the City Planner.
35. Stormwater Flow. The stonnwater ponds shall be designed so that stonnwater does not
flow onto the property from the pipes dirccting stonnwater away from the property.
36. Constrnction Vehicles. Construction vchicles shall only use the entrance on Highway
. 96.
37. Canopies/Awnings. Canopies and awnings shall not be pennitted in the development.
Since the minutes from the City Council meeting were not available when this report was
prepared, the final wording of the conditions are subject to change pending review of the
minutes,
City of Arden Hills
. Planning Cornmission Jvleetingfor September 6,2006
\\Metro-il1c1.us\ardenhills\PJanning\PJanning COO1mission\CC Reports\083006 - PC rcp0l1 CC report.doc
Page 5 of 5