The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About12-05-07-WS/PC Chair ~ David Sand 1245 W. Highway 96 Commissioners d\~HILLS Arden Hills, MN 55112 Andrew Holewa 651.792.7800 Clayton Larson Arden Hills www.ci.arden-hills.mn.us Liz Modesette Janet Stodola Planning Commission Roberta Thompson Clayton Zimmerman December 5, 2007 City Vision A strong community that values our unique environment, our fiscal soundness, and our tradition as a desirable citv in which to live, work, and plav. Agenda Planning Commission Work Session Regarding the RV Ordinance at 5:30 PM Regular Planning Commission Convenes 6:30 PM Call to Order 1. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA 2. MINUTES A. November 7, 2007 Regular Meeting B. November 7, 2007 Work Session 3. PLANNING CASES A. Planning Case 07-029; Variance; Mathew & Ann Wessberg; 1455 Skiles Lane - Not a Public Hearing B. Planning Case 07-031; Conditional Use Permit Amendment; Blue Fox Bar and Grill; 3833 Lexington Avenue - Public Hearing C. Planning Case 07-025; Zoning Code Text Amendment for RV Storage; City of Arden Hills; 1245 West Highway 96 - Public Hearing D. Planning Case 07-030; Zoning Code Text Amendment for Permitted Encroachments; City of Arden Hills; 1245 West Highway 96 - Public Hearing 4. UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS A. Planning Commission Terms (informational only) 5. REPORTS A. Report from the City Council B. Planning Commission Comments and Requests 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/planninQcases ~ ~HILLS December 5, 2007 Planning Case Map ! o 0.15 0.3 0.6 Mile ~ ~~HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: December 5, 2007 PC Agenda Item 3.A TO: Planning Commission Meagan Beekman, Planner I IJ FROM: SUBJECT: Planning Case #07-029 Variance Mathew and Ann Wessberg 1455 Skiles Lane ATTACHMENTS: 3A-l Application and Supporting Materials 3A-2 Air Photo and Photographs ofthe Site Requested Action The applicant is requesting a variance to construct a 576 square foot below grade garage and a 192 square foot above grade addition along the southern side ofthe dwelling at 1455 Skiles Lane that encroaches 24 feet into the setback. Approximately 480 square feet of the proposed addition would encroach in to the front yard setback, of this only 96 square feet would be above grade and visible from Skiles Lane Backl!round 1. Overview of Request The property owner is proposing to construct a 576 square foot below grade garage and a 192 square foot above grade addition to the existing one story home at 1455 Skiles Lane (Attachment 3A-l). In addition, the applicant proposes to construct a 240 square foot deck over the back of the new garage that would also encroach two feet into the permitted front yard setback for decks. Presently, the dwelling has a two car attached garage that is below grade and does not meet current building code requirements. It has a ceiling height of six feet two inches. Current City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meetingfor December 5, 2007 \\AhdocsllAHlAHdatalPlanninglPlanning Cases\2007\07-029 Wessberg Variance (PENDING)\120507 - PC Report - Wessberg Variance. doc Page 1 of9 Minnesota Building Code requires six feet eight inches. As a result of the substandard garage, the applicants cannot park their vehicles in their garage and must store them on the driveway. The proposed addition would be constructed adjacent to the existing garage to the south of the property and remain in line with the front and rear of the existing structure. The addition would replace the existing garage, bringing it up to building code, and provide two new garage stalls and a small addition to the dwelling. The current footprint of the structure is 1,497 square feet. The existing home is a walkout with a tuck under garage facing the back of the property. The driveway enters the property from the south and curves to the west to access the existing garage. The property is unique in that it has three front yard setbacks to the south, east, and west. This is due to the property's location along the curve of Skiles Lane and adjacency to Snelling A venue. The extreme grade shifts from the front to the back yard would permit most of this addition to be located below grade and thus not be visible from Skiles Lane. Because ofthis lot configuration, alternative locations for a two car garage that meets building code are extremely limited. The only other alternative would be a detached garage located in the rear ofthe property; however, this configuration would also require the garage to meet a forty foot setback to Snelling A venue, thus requiring that it be placed within a few feet of the existing dwelling and be above grade. Along Skiles Lane, the existing structure encroaches ten feet into the 40 foot front yard setback (Attachment 3A-l and 2). The applicant is proposing to step back the above grade addition in line with the curve of Skiles Lane and to maintain the architectural lines and continuity ofthe structure. The below grade garage would remain in line with the front and rear of the existing structure. The cantilevered deck would extend into the rear ofthe property over the proposed new garage. In total, approximately 480 square feet of the proposed addition would encroach in to the front yard setback, ofthis only 96 square feet would be above grade and visible from Skiles Lane. There are no previous variances on file for this property. The applicant has submitted a description of the proposed addition, a response to the variance evaluation criteria, a letter describing the landscaping plan, and a site plan of the property (Attachment 3A-l). 2. Site Data Low Density Residential Single Detached Home R-l: Single-Family residential district .32 acres (13,939 square feet) The property drops approximately eight to ten feet from the west to the east City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meetingfor December 5, 2007 \\AhdocslIAHlAHdata\Planning\Planning Cases\2007\07-029 Wessberg Variance (PENDING)\120507 - PC Report - Wessberg Variance. doc Page 2 of9 1. R-1 Regulations, Existing Proposed Redevelopment Conditions, and 3. Surrounding Area North Low Density Residential R-l: Single-Fanrily residential Single Fanrily Detached district Residential South Low Density Residential R-I: Single-Fanrily residential Single Fanrily Detached district Residential East Low Density Residential R-I: Single-Fanrily residential Single Family Detached district Residential West Low Density Residential R-l: Single-Fanrily residential Single Fanrily Detached district Residential Piau Evaluation The lot is 13,939 square feet, 130 feet wide and 108 feet long. The lot size is nonconforming in the R-l Zone. 4. Lot Covered b Structure 5. Min. Landsca e Lot Area 95/130 35 25% 65% A. Lot Size & Dimensions As noted above, the existing house encroaches ten feet into the forty foot front yard setback to Skiles Lane. The proposed garage and addition would extend 24 feet into the front yard setback, ten feet of which would be above grade. structure meets all required setbacks. 40 30 10 B. Structure Setbacks - Variance Required 10/25 10 40 The rest of the C. Lot Coverage - Meets Requirements. The existing and proposed lot coverages do not exceed the lot coverage limitations of the R-l Zone. Existing Prollosed Square Feet % Square Feet % House/garage 1,497 10.7% 2,073 14.9% Drivewav 1,685 12.1% 1,685 12.1% Sidewalk 179 1.3% 179 1.3% Total Coverage 3,361 24.1% 3,937 28.2% Lot Size 13,939 13,939 City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meetingfor December 5, 2007 llAhdocsllAH\AHdatalPlanning\Planning Cases\2007\07-029 Wessberg Variance (PENDING)\120507 - PC Report - Wessberg Variance.doc Page 3 of9 D. Structure Height - Meets Requirements The existing dwelling with the proposed addition would not exceed the 35 foot height limit. 2. Flood Plain, Wetlands, and Easements The proposed addition is outside of any flood plains, wetlands, or easements. 3. Additional Review This application may require Rice Creek Watershed District approval prior to the issuance of any building permits. If the variance is approved, a condition has been added requiring RCWD review prior to the issuance of building permits. Variance Evaluation Criteria The criteria listed below must be used to evaluate each of the variance requests. A. Variance Review Criteria - Section 1355.04 Subd. 4.C: Variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code may be granted in instances where the strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration. Variances shall only be granted when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Code. "Undue hardship," as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means: . The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use under conditions permitted by the Zoning Code; . The plight ofthe landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; . The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character ofthe locality; and, . Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Code. B. Additional Review Information: Although State Statutes include guidelines for evaluating variances, the interpretation and meaning of those Statutes have been impacted by various court decisions. A somewhat common, though apparently incorrect, interpretation of the written Statutes is that a City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for December 5, 2007 \ \AhdocsllAHlAHdatalPlanning\Planning Cases\2007\07-029 Wessberg Variance (PENDING)\120507 - PC Report - Wessberg Variance. doc Page 4 of9 property owner must show that they do not have reasonable use of their property without an approved variance. The difficulty with this standard is what counts as "reasonable use" of the property? Since most properties could be construed to have "reasonable use" without a variance, this standard was declared virtually insurmountable by the Court of Appeals. A revised interpretation of the "reasonable use" evaluation criteria has emerged from the Minnesota Court of Appeals. According to the City Attorney, a property owner does not need to show that reasonable use for a property only exists with an approved variance. Instead, the landowner must only demonstrate that the proposed variation is reasonable for a particular property in a given zone. For example, the property owner must only demonstrate that an addition that encroaches into a particular setback is reasonable as opposed to showing that the property would only have reasonable use with the addition. While this is a much softer interpretation of reasonable use, the applicant must still address all four variance criteria listed above. Findinl!s of Fact Staff offers the following sixteen findings of fact for review: General Findings 1. The lot depth and width exceed the minimum R-l requirements. The lot size of 13,939 square feet is nonconforming in the R -1 Zone. 2. The existing structure encroaches ten feet into the forty foot front yard setback along Skiles Lane. The structure meets all other R -1 setback requirements. 3. The proposed addition would encroach 24 feet into the front yard setback. Approximately 480 square feet of the proposed addition would encroach in to the front yard setback, of this only 96 square feet would be above grade and visible from Skiles Lane. The area of the addition outside of the setbacks does not require a variance. The proposed addition would be in line with the existing home, and the portion visible from Skiles Lane would step back with the existing structure. 4. The proposed addition does not encroach on the required front yard setback along Snelling Avenue. 5. The existing and proposed lot coverage meets the R -1 Zone requirements. 6. The existing garage does not meet the height requirements of the Building Code, thus the proposed garage would bring the property into greater conformance with modern building code requirements. 7. The dwelling with the proposed addition would not exceed the 35 foot height limit. 8. Dwellings are permitted structures within the R-l Zone. 9. The existing dwelling and the proposed garage are outside of the 100-year flood plain, wetlands, and easements. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meetingfor December 5, 2007 1 lAhdocsllAHlAHdata\PlanninglPlanning Cases\2007\07~029 Wessberg Variance (PENDING) \120507 - PC Report - Wessberg Variance.doc Page 5of9 10. The lot was platted prior to the incorporation of Arden Hills and the structure was built prior to the current R-l zoning district requirements. The lot was platted in 1944 and the structure was built in 1954. Variance Findings: 11. A garage and addition are permitted and reasonable uses within the R-l Zone. 12. There are unique lot configuration conditions that may warrant the variance. The property is situated on the curve of Skiles Lane as it intersects with Snelling Avenue, thus creating three front yard setback requirements to the south, east, and west sides of the lot. 13. The topographic conditions are unique in that there is a significant slope downward from the west to the east which allows the majority ofthe addition to be built below grade. 14. Since the proposed above grade addition would not encroach any farther into the front yard setback than the existing structure, the addition is unlikely to have a negative impact on the property or the neighborhood. The continued encroachment would not have a noticeable visual impact from Skiles Lane. 15. The addition would be visible from the rear of the property, which abuts Snelling Avenue; however the closest neighbor on this side is over 300 feet away. 16. The proposed plans and setback variance for the dwelling do not appear to be based on economic considerations alone. Staff Analvsis The findings of fact for this variance request do not specifically support a recommendation for denial or approval. A single family home is a permitted use in the R-l Zone, and the addition is not an unreasonable use in the R -1 Zone. The existing tuck under garage does not meet building code, and as such the applicants cannot store their vehicles in it. As a result the vehicles are now being stored outside. The variance is unlikely to cause a negative impact to the neighborhood or City because there is already a structure on the property, the proposed above grade addition will not be closer to the front lot line than the existing structure, and all other coverage requirements are met. The below grade portion of the addition would only be visible from the rear of the structure. It does not appear that the variance is based on economic considerations alone. As is often the case, the evaluation criterion that states "The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner," is the difficult evaluation criterion. The three front yard setback requirements make alternative placement of a new garage extremely difficult; however, there presently exists a two car garage on the property. According to the applicant, this garage cannot be used to store their vehicles. While the proposed variance is unlikely to have a negative impact on the neighborhood, the Planning Commission must still consider all of the variance criteria. The applicant has submitted a plan that attempts to solve the issues of the site while bringing the structure into greater conformance with the building code. By using the grade changes that are already on site the applicant has been able to build most of the addition below grade, thus City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meetingfor December 5, 2007 llAhdocsl\AH1AHdatalPlanning\Planning Cases\2007\07-029 Wessberg Variance (PENDING)\J20507 - PC Report - Wessberg Variance.doc Page 6 of9 reducing its visibility from the street. The architecture and materials for the addition appear to be in line with the character and style of the existing home, and the above grade portion ofthe addition would be in line with the existing setback of the home. This addition will impact a spruce tree to the south of the property and an oak tree to the east. Both trees are located within the footprint of the proposed changes. Presently, there are no requirements for tree preservation or landscaping on existing residential lots; however, the applicant is proposing to move the spruce tree farther to the south of the lot in order to save it. The applicant is also showing plans to preserve the oak tree by wrapping the driveway and deck around it. While there can be no guaranty that either tree will survive the construction process, the applicant has taken steps to ensure that the trees will be preserved. It should be noted that most ofthe homes along Skiles Lane were built in the early 1950s. The subject lot was likely required to meet different setback regulations when the dwelling was constructed in 1954; however, those exact regulations are not available. Although being subject to different regulations when the building was constructed does not automatically warrant the approval of a variance, it may help provide context for why the structure was built with what would now be considered front yard setback encroachments. Based on a quick review of the neighborhood, the 30 foot front yard setbacks appear to be common features on a number of dwellings along Skiles Lane. A full survey ofthe neighborhood would be needed to verify the exact setbacks of other lots. If the Planning Commission recommends approval on this variance, Staff recommends the following six conditions: 1. The project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted as amended by the conditions of approval. Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission. 2. The applicant shall use best management practices (BMPs) to control erosion at all times during construction. 3. The applicant shall obtain approval from the Rice Creek Watershed District, and a copy of the RCWD permit or a waiver shall be submitted to the City prior to the issuance of any building permits. 4. The structure shall conform to all other regulations in the City Code. 5. The addition shall be the same color and use the same construction materials as the existing structure. 6. All attempts shall be made by the applicant to move the spruce tree and preserve the oak tree that will be impacted by the project. Options The findings in this report are not specific enough to fully support approval or denial ofthis variance. With a motion to approve or deny the variance, the italicized criteria must be addressed for the record: City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meetingfor December 5, 2007 \\Ahdocsl\AH\AHdatalPlanningIPlanning Cases\2007\07~029 Wessberg Variance (PENDING)\120507 - PC Report - Wessberg Variance.doc Page 7 of9 1. The proposed addition is/is not a reasonable use in the R-l Zone because... 2. The proposed addition will/will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood or the City because... 3. The circumstances in this planning case are/are not unique to the property because... 4. The variance is/is not based on economic considerations alone because. . . Criteria 1, 2, and 4 are already addressed in the findings. Criteria three must be addressed for the record prior to making a motion. 1. Recommend Approval with Conditions: Motion to recommend avvroval of Planning Case 07-029 for a variance at 1455 Skiles Lane based on the findings of fact, the submitted plans, and the six conditions in the December 5, 2007, planning case report. 2. Recommend Approval as Submitted: Motion to recommend avvroval of Planning Case 07- 029 for a variance at 1455 Skiles Lane based on the findings offacts and the submitted plans in the December 5, 2007, planning case report. 3. Recommend Denial: Motion to recommend denial of Planning Case 07-029 for a variance at 1455 Skiles Lane based on the following findings offact... 4. Table: Motion to table Planning Case 07-029 for a variance at 1455 Skiles Lane: a specific reason and/or information request should be included with a motion to table. Notice Although a variance does not require a public hearing, a public meeting notice was prepared by the City and mailed to properties within three-hundred fifty (350) feet ofthe subject property. Resident Comment The City has received letters from three of Mr. and Mrs, Wessberg's neighbors indicating their support for the project (Attachment 3A-2). Deadline for Al!encv Actions The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on November 5, 2007. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, the City must act on this request by January 4, 2007 (60 days), nnless the City provides the petitioner with written reasons for an additional 60 day review period. The City may with the petitioners' consent extend the review period beyond the 120 days. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meetingfor December 5, 2007 llAhdocsllAH1AHdataIP/anningIPlanning Cases\2007\07-029 Wessberg Variance (PENDING)\l20507 - PC Reporl- Wessberg Variance.doc Page 8 of9 Attachments 3A-l 3A-2 Application and Supporting Materials Air Photo and Photographs of the Site City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meetingfor December 5, 2007 \\Ahdocsl\AHlAHdataIP/anningIPlanning Cases\2007\07-029 Wessberg Variance (PENDING)\120507 - PC Report - Wessberg Variance. doc Page 9of9 Attachment 3A -1 Application and Supporting Materials ~ ~HILLS December 5,2007, Planning Commission Meeting ~ ~LS 1245 West Highway 96 Arden Hills, Minnesota 55112 Telephone (651) 634-5120 Fax (651) 634-5137 www.ci.arden-hills.mn.us For Office Use Only Planning Case No. Submittal Date Application Completed Date Accepted by Receipt Number v \"i:; ""- Council Decision Council Decision Date 2007 LAND USE APPLICATION Fax No.: k Email Address: vJe'Z~1:(;E_iU"'-~ l)'S \ ~E..R., I'=~ C<>rJ\. Proeertv Information Properly Owner: Iv\f\~ \ ~"" \JB,'2.C>~ Owner Address: SfvJ... "2- Owner Telephone No. Address of Properly Involved: Legal Description: l"" L\ ?" 1'~ ,<. L.\ . Other: Cz.LL c..oS \ - LJ.J0 - L. I Other: . \ \)~, L..-.- Zone: Tvee of Reauest" o Apportionment of Assessments ($30) o Comprehensive Plan Amendment ($400) o Conditional Use Permit or Amended CUP ($300) o Final Plat ($200 + $25 per lot) o Final Planned Unit Development ($200) o Master Planned Unit Development ($600 + escrow) o Minor Subdivision (lot split/consolidation) ($300) o Preliminary Plat ($400 + $25 per lot + escrow) o Rezoning ($400) o Site Plan Review ($400) o Site Plan Review (Sign or Fence) ($250) ,Qyacation of Easement or Right-of-Way ($250 + escrow) A'Variance (Zoning Code) ($300) o Zoning Code Amendment ($300 + escrow) Revised: 12-12-2006 Page 1 of3 J S,~. . Applicants are responsible for reimbursement of consultant fees associated with filing, reviewing, and processing of this application. Such fees are to be paid in escrow up front or upon receipt of statement from the City of Arden Hills. Fees include costs for consultants retained by the City and include consultant planning services, attorney, and engineer. 'Payment of park dedication fees are required with the approval of most subdivision applications. *The land use application fees do not cover building, sign, or other permit fees that may be required upon approval of a land use application. 'Certain applications are subject to review and approval by the Rice Creek Watershed District. Contact RCWD directly at 763-398- 3070 for additional information. -~ ed detailed letter ex lainin the ro'ect: Brief Description of Request ~::-TO ~ r;:;:~~:J1~~ 2<< I Filing & Information Reauirements The City requests that you make a pre-application meeting with the City Planner to discuss the application process, requirements, and deadlines. Unless waived by the City Planner or Planning Commission, a certified survey of the property is required for all applications. The Planning Commission and/or City Council may still require a certified survey. A checklist for other required information is also available. Complete/Incomplete Applications An incomplete application will delay the processing of 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) working 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 provided that all required public notices have been sent and published. Payment of Fees The undersigned acknowledges that she/he understands that before a land use application can be deemed complete, all required information and fees (including all deposits) must be paid to the City. 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, withhold building permits, andlor 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. Unused portions of an escrow are retumed to the applicant upon successful implementation of an approved plan. Notice of Meetina Attendance In order for the Planning Commission and the City Council to consider any application, the applicant or a designated representative must be present at the scheduled meeting. If not, the matter may be tabled until the next available agenda. Revised: 12-12-2006 Page 2 of3 Aaenda Deadline and Meetina Schedule The deadline for submittal of land use applications is required according to the schedule outlined below. There are no exceptions. Planning Commission meetings are typically held on the first Wednesday of each month at 7:00 PM, though please contact City Hall to verify the meeting date and time. City Council meetings are held typically the last Monday of the same month at 7:00 PM. Meetings are held in the Council Chambers at the City of Arden Hills, 1245 West Highway 96, Arden Hills, Minnesota 55112, unless otherwise stated. Applicants are advised that additional meetings and/or workshops are scheduled when necessary upon approval of the Planning Commission. 2007 SCHEDULE ('subject to change) Ma 7 TENTATIVE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING' (Generally held on the first Wednesda at 7:00 .m. JSnus . tOr 2?ZWednesdS Februa 7 TENTATIVE CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE' (Generally held on the last Monda at 7:00 .m. APPLICATION DEADLINE DATE' December 4 2006 Janua 8 March 5 November 5 December 3 Acknowledaement and Sianature d e that I have read all of the information listed in the City of Arden Hills Land Use Application n r t d that I am responsible for all costs incurred by the City related to the pr cessing of ti . Applicant Signature (If different than the property owner) Date Please contact the City Planner at (651) 634-5134 or by email atiames.lehnhoff@cLarden-hills.mn.usif you have any questions regarding this application. Additional copies of this application form are available on the City's website: htto:/Iwww.ci.arden-hiffs.mn.us Revised: 12-12-2006 Page 3 of3 THE FOUNDATION Archit~cts/Col1stlltal1ts RA. 212 Third Ave N Suite 460 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Ph 612.340.5430 Fax 612.340.5431 To: The City of Arden Hills Board of Zoning Appeals From: Robert Shaffer, AlA, CID Date: 10/30/07 Re: Variance for the Wessberg Residence, 1455 Skiles Lane, Arden Hills, MN We have looked into alternatives to expand the existing undersized garage and feel that the proposed option minimizes the impact to the neighborhood, reduces variance requests and is the most pleasing. The following hardships and site conditions are present on this site: 1. The existing garage ceiling height is very low with an interior height dimension of 6'-2" at lhe door. The existing garage door does not meet current Stale of Minnesota Building Codes, which is a minimum of 6'-8". This low door height is also a concern for people's safety. Many cars cannot even fit into lhis garage, including the homeowner's vehicle. An unusable existing garage with code issues is a hardship. By adding a new, building code-compliant garage addition, the reasonable use of this property has been maintained. 2. The street presence and the impact to the neighborhood will be negligible. The design is intended to extend the existing garage mostly below grade so that it will look as though it is just landscaping terraces in the yard with a slightly raised deck attached to the home. The deck then extends ouiward wrapping around the tree. The addition and the deck will match the character of the existing home and maintain the scale and proportion of the neighborhood. 3. The house sits on an unusual lot due to its three "front yards". The lot has frontages on Old Snelling and a wrap-around frontage on iwo sides by Skiles Lane. This presents difficulties to adding an addilion while mainlaining the reasonable use of the property. 4. The existing house on the unusually shaped lot already protrudes into lhe two fronl setbacks on Skiles lane to what appears to be a historic thirty foot setback. The house was built on the site to align with a north-south axis, rather than align with the curve of the street. The original house design steps back with the curve of Skiles Lane and lhe proposed garage/deck/sunroom addition design would repeat the stepping, staying well within the historic thirty foot selback, thus creating a similar rhythm to the design already in place. The goal of the design is to make it appear as though the addition was original to the home. 5. The exisling garage also creates issues with the exisling mechanical systems of the home. The mechanical system is un insulated in the garage crealing cold pipes and duciwork in the kitchen and dining room directly above. The existing mechanical system in the garage will be difficult to insulate properly because of the low ceiling height of the garage. 6. To be environmentally conscious, the large tree at the southeast corner of lhe house would ideally be spared by locating the addilion to the south of the house. lDT~ER - --- ------ .. - - -lDTf-\- _ _ " , : I n\~' I 74'~ ", \ I ---_ ", \ " , , , I -..--...., '\\ -"''''', \ \ \ I \ \ \ \ \5'-0': 5'-0" \~ I \ I, / f I I I / I I I I I I I / / //---------- - I / / I \ I :tINTIlMRW NEW pecK! ~ ' / \ I TREE~'\ / /0/ \ I I // 1-,. \ \ ' I; \ ," 58'-4' ~ / NEWMAlhVI / I ________ I ; 51' NR9DM I ,Si / I ' " Ul / 0 --~rr. OF CURVE I I EXISTING I-STORY RANCH /,' I ~ '<t GO'-9'/~ /1 -" It' ,/ C\I / . I _/ ... \ .I, 1/ I 75'-0'; / -'fi'EW~KOYJ; NEW /,' 1,;1 _ //, // 2'~J9FfGAAAGE /1 I " 5G'-3'.. 'I -/ -~ -~'- 2~' 0" / I L-- __--/-// / -/-:::-=~.s:;::::/ -t"""' ~ 53'-2' 1'- / I -- - \ \ //./ ----1-----) /, _--/-- /J~ , ~ ,//,1' ; _.- ---r-~-' /?-r ______, 53'-7" 31-G ""' ___r-' I \ _--57'~~/ ' ~_ " '~ / / --~----f--/i----\\ ,// i ~.~----------------- "',""' \ //~' I I \/ ~/ : ;1 /44'-8' ,)i' / 38'-4.5' ~)Y i I / \ ~. I I / /" \ / G3'-4,5>~ I; / / 39'-11,,\ / ~~'~ JI/ \;1 ~~-_. I / '/30'-7" __.:- ./~/ LOT CORNER Y, _' - ,-' END OF CURVE SITE PLAN INFORMATION APPROXIMATE LOT SIZE 13,900 SF (COUN1Y RECORDS) EXISTING SQUARE FOOTAGE PROPOSED TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE APPROXIMATE BUILDING COVERAGE APPROXIMATE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE 1.478 SF 2,054 SF /4.8% 28.9% " " \ \ \ \ ' --1.----/ 30'-0" SETBACt;5 15'-0' I I G) Proposed Site Plan 5CALE: I" = 20' NEB THE FOUNDATION Architects / Consultants P. A. 212ThirdAvenueNonh, Suite460 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 www.jOundationarchcom phone. 612.340.5430 fax. 612.340.5431 I certif)'thatthlsplan, spedficatlon,Q'" reportWllspreparedbymeorundetmy direct supervlslon & that I em a ddy reglstered~ under1tle Jaws cfthestate of .~, ....~- Dllle_ Reg. No. 20803 Revision No. Date I1.l ~ .til "il ~~ ~"8 U Ol) S ~.ll 11 ~ ~~ t/l t/l ~ copyright 2007 Site Plan Date Project No. 10130/07 07-21 AD New Addltlon- West Elevation 5CAlE: 3/4" ~ 1'-0" THE FOUNDATION Architects / Consultants P. A. 212 ThirdAvenueNorth, Suite 460 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 wwwfoundationarch.com phone. 612.340.5430 fax. 612.340.5431 I certify lhatthlsp/an, specifICation, or report was prepared by me or under my dlrectsupervlslon & that lam a duly registered AACI1rrocT under the Jaws of the slate of ,~, FD!wtA.5holfclr Date_ Rag.Na. 20803 ".."'" No. D.. l!) [:j .g .~ - "" l!) ~"8 e!'~ .3~ "" "" ~ ~~ "' . ... ]!e ~.ll ~~ copyright 2007 Exterior Elevation- Addition Date Project No. 10/30/07 07-21 Al - --- 11f'- ,,~ -,-i' ;"<.,)1:,:' ),;' ,'5',,\,' . ';,~t~-" ~ ~:l!r:. . . "~- -- ,~I . ,"~~I .' i.~ ,J /{:."';~I ".':'1 " ,'.' ,~, ",.. ',pi;" .'... ~.h", J~'~~" - .',' '.' C," h,-.;, _<' ,.' ',',,~'~,~:_ c __. ,,:,' ", '''-,'', :", ~'2",>' "",c'- c;'t.Ar' <- ,~" , ;'J'; New Addltlon- South Elevation 5CAlE: 3/4" = 1'-0" THE FOUNDATION Architects / Consultants P. A. ,.;" 'vi ",.; " " 212 ThirdAvenueNorth, Suite 460 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 -""":i.",: , '-'//:'-.' wwwfowrdationarch.com /';'-; . phone. 612.340.5430 fax. 612.340,5431 -{ ~" " , lcertlfylhatlhis plan, speclficalion, or report was prepllred by me or und&rmy direct supervision &that 1 am a duly registered AAa1rm:r under the laws oflhe state of MiIlNESOT,I, Rt:<>ertA.5haH.... Date_ Reg, No. 20803 I I I I I I R"""'" No, Dale (\) g -8 ....- '" (\) ~1l e.'l5 ..8~ '" '" ~ 3~ . ~ -= ;a;s ~~ :\< copyright 2007 Exterior Elevation- Addition Date Project No. 10/30/07 07-21 A2 I.-_ I lOGICAL I APPROACH uc Logical Approach LLC 649 Hoyt Ave W StPaul,MN 55117 651.489.4333 office To: The City of Arden Hills Attention Meagon Beekmon 1245 West Highway 96 Arden Hills, MN 55112 Direct: (651) 792-7828 Fax: (651) 634-5137 Re: Wessberg Residence I am writing this response in regards to the Wessberg request for variance and the questions that have arouse about the process of tree preservation for the Oak tree on the south side of the structure and the Spruce tree spading also on the south side of the property. All preservation and spading will be done in accordance with all standards according to the American Nursery Standards and applicable recommendations from Minnesota Department of Transportation. The Oak tree on the South East corner of the residence will have a tree protection fence installed around its drip line prior to the onset of any construction or demolition. The fence will stand until the completion of construction. According to the American Nursery Standards the loss of 1/3 of the outer most roots should not stress the tree to a point of killing the tree. The spruce tree will be transplanted using a spade truck. The tree will originally have a spade run through the soil around the drip line 2-weeks before actual moving of the tree. This cut allows the tree to get used to having its small outer roots being trimmed and allows the tree to not have as much stress from one movement. After 2-weeks the tree will be moved, fertilized, and watered. The process of pre-spading before moving reduces the stress and the likely hood of death. Please feel free to call with any questions or concerns. Karl Kangas Owner Kangas Design Company LLC 649 Hoyt Avenue West St. Paul, Minnesota 55117 651.489.4333 tele. KangQ06@netzero.com November 4, 2007 Andrew Adams 1450 Skiles Lane Arden Hills, MN 55112 RE: Wessberg Variance Request To Whom it May Concern: My wife Jennifer and I reside across the street from Matt and Ann Wessberg. Their house and the variance they request are clearly visible from our home. I have reviewed the plans for which Wessbergs request their variance and have no objection to the variance they request. Sincerely, rrZ~ Andrew Adams November 4, 2007 Lillian Michael 1454 Skiles Lane Arden Hills, MN 55112 RE: 1455 Skiles Request for Variance Dear Sir or Madam: I live across the street from Matt and Ann Wessberg, who are requesting a variance to build onto their home to correct the current garage, which cannot contain their cars. Matt Wessberg has share the plans for the project with me, and it appears that the addition he has planned is consistent with the neighborhood. I will be able to see the new addition from my window, and I have no objection to the variance the Wessbergs seek. Sincerely, ~~ Lillian Michael November 4, 2007 James and Susan Bergan 1458 Skiles Lane Arden Hills, MN 55112 RE: Wessberg Request for Variance To Whom It May Concern: We reside across the street from Matt and Ann Wessberg. We understand that the Wessbergs are seeking a variance in order to build on their property so that they can have a two-car garage to correct the current garage which is too low to accommodate their cars. We have seen and discussed the plans with Matt Wessberg, and see no reason that their plans would not suit the neighborhood. We have no objection to the plans for which the Wessbergs seek their variance. Sincerely, Susan Bergan Attachment 3A - 2 Air Photo and Photographs of the Site ~ ~HILLS December 5, 2007, Planning Commission Meeting Q" ~ ~ ~ Q,) .. -< Q,) = ~ ...;! ~ Q,) - :E2 rLl trl trl """ .... :~'i~ \ '" 'C o . " o '0 u " <S ~ o o N 'E -< ;g' .9 ..fl ~~"'@ a s'.g ~~:9 ~~! o ~~ ~~"@ 'B @'B !':~ ~ ge~ ~.B 8 S'-g~ 0_ U"~ .00 _~o '~8~ ll~~ .~ 1! fl ~ "'~ g; " ~z. " 0 . 0..= ~ --." ~~~ JJ 1;l<<llS "4 ~~e ,9.9 "'0"1:: v ~ b18 " u ~:;;""O .. g a gg] .~ :; a ."u "-5 . 0 " >>." 0 ~a8 0_" :g,s s~S " 0 g:~ :~ E."N "'O~ i3 ~"'O..o l51il~ ~BO .... 5 .~ ..Q.",;j "a ~8 ~co _00 .0 u " u C ~.~~ c_.o .~ g.,g ~'5!- e~~ .:!l._g ~]N ~~?i >r:t.Q.... ~~.g ;:5-ot) U ~ '" <'5 c o o U J Ui el '" :0 o '" Q.. ~ ~ ~ .... .... r:I) ~ = ~ ....:l ~ . . " o '0 o " >E '" o o N 'E -g -< <:l <i o ~ .9 ."0 'idb<d E g'~ ~ g~ .:- e.2 "8 ~"'O 00.0 o . . eu"@ ""' d... ~] ~ o . e .~ ~ 8 :=..9 u S'"2,2 o. oo~ ..0 .~~~ go:; ~ s.-,o ","05 ._ d > t: ": 0 dZ. oo~ o~~ ~ . . "'Oe"O ~ <:l 8 0" 0 ad3 e S>~ 00 .;~O . . 0 -0 ~" 0" ."-0 .5 e a oJ:;u !': 0 ~ .~ : <:l -0" 0.0 <:l 0 d !)of! g t.u o . " "'0..9 e15t' gog o.<;;N E.g~ "O~ i:i -E]'8 o . 0 ~ ~9~ :sti_ 25 ~€c5 _ o. .00 ~ Q~ u i'€~ 0.'" .0. ._ 0..<:: o.;Cf-< <<l ~ ~ ~.Eb ~~~~ ..<<10\ ffi.Q~ ~Z3] ;:"gs d 0 ~ Q '" ~ - :s r:I) In In ..., .... o o o U . e . '" u; to ~ :0 o ~ Q) U t: co ";: co > C) L- Q) ..c l/) l/) Q) ~ c>> N o I .... o '*l: U a.. Q) " '" ..J '" .!!! ~ <Il E e ... " o :;:; '" " o ..J " o :E ." ." <( ." ~ '" ;: o - - '" '" Q) .l:: 1:: o Z Cl " ~ o o ..J Q) Cl '" ~ '" C) Cl " :;:; '" 'X W ." ~ '" ;: o - - '" Q) s: Cl " ~ o o ..J Q) " '" ..J '" .!!! ~ <Il E o ~ ... - '" Q) ;: .l:: 1:: o Z Cl " ~ o o ..J Q) " '" ..J '" .!!! ~ <Il E e ... .l:: 1:: o Z Cl " ~ o o ..J PC# 07-029 Wessberg Variance Looking West from Snelling Avenue towards Proposed Addition Looking Northwest from Driveway towards Proposed Addition ~ ~HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: December 5, 2007 PC Agenda Item 3.B TO: Planning Commission FROM: Meagan Beekman, Planner I ,~ SUBJECT: Planning Case #: 07-031 Blue Fox Bar and Grill Conditional Use Permit Amendment 3833 Lexington Avenue ATTACHMENTS: 3B-l Project description and site plans 3B-2 Building Official review 3B-3 Area map, air photo and pictures ofthe site Requested Action The applicant has requested a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Amendment to construct a 140 square foot, partially enclosed smoking deck on the northwest corner ofthe building at 3833 Lexington Avenue. Backl!round 1. Overview of Request: The Blue Fox Bar and Grill is proposing to construct a 140 square foot smoking deck on the northwest corner of their building at 3833 Lexington Avenue. The deck is proposed to have a partially enclosed roof, full walls on two sides, a half wall on one side, and no wall on the other side but rather be enclosed by a railing (Attachment 3B-l). The proposed plans also include screening and a fence to enclose the deck for security purposes, to stop people from transferring items over the deck and from accessing the parking lot from the deck, as well as to keep out bugs in the summer. The deck will include an emergency exit. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meetingfor December 5, 2007 llAhdocsllAJi1.AHdatalPlanninglPlanning Cases\2007\07-031 Blue Fox CUP Amendment (PENDING) \120507 - PC Report -Blue Fox CUP Amendment.doc Page 1 of 7 Construction of the deck was started without a building permit or any prior City approval (Attachment 3B-3). The Building Official placed a stop work order on the project pending approval of this Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Amendment. The applicant complied with the stop work order and filed this request for a CUP Amendment to continue with the work. The property is currently operating under a CUP, and exterior changes to the building require a CUP Amendment. In the event that this CUP Amendment is not approved, the applicant is aware that the smoking deck would need to be removed. The applicant was constructing the deck in order to provide space for patrons to smoke due to the recent statewide ban on smoking in bars, restaurants, and other public places (htto://www.health.state.mn.us/freedomtobreathe/). The applicant has indicated that he would like to be able to allow alcoholic drinks on the deck; however, the City Attorney has determined that the City issued liquor license currently does not permit alcoholic beverages to be consumed outdoors. Furthermore, the City Attorney has determined that the City Code does not have provisions for allowing the consumption of alcoholic beverages in outdoor areas of bars and restaurants. At the direction of the City Council, Staff is currently working on an amendment to Chapter Five of the City Code regarding liquor licenses. This amendment would likely allow alcoholic beverages to be consumed outdoors in designated areas, which would probably be in smoking areas and subject to certain design provisions. The liquor code amendment is not expected to be completed until January 2008. Therefore, if this CUP Amendment is granted, alcoholic beverages will not be permitted in this smoking area until a change in City Code is enacted and Blue Fox Bar and Grill applies for an amendment to their liquor license with the City. The applicant is aware of this restriction. The following planning cases have been previously reviewed for this property: 73-049 Conditional Use Restaurant and Liquor 3/25/75 (A) Permit Lounge 76-012 Conditional Use Restaurant and Liquor 7/19/76 (A) Permit Amendment Lounge Expansion 87-024 Conditional Use Restaurant and Liquor 8/10/87 (A) Permit Amendment Lounge Expansion City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for December 5, 2007 \\AhdocslIAHlAHdata\PlanningIPlanning Cases\2007107-031 Blue Fox CUP Amendment (PENDING)\120507 ~ PC Report - Blue Fox CUP Amendment.doc Page 2 of 7 2. Site Data: Industrial Community Commercial B-3 Service Business District 1.34 acres (58,570.4 square leet) Generally Flat 3. Surrounding Area: North Right-at-Way I Commercial 8-3 Service Business District Right-ol-Way I Neighborhood Commercial South Industrial 8-3 Service Business District Light Industrial East Right-af-Way I Community Right-ol-Way I P.U.D. (Shoreview) Right-ol-Way I Community Commercial (Shoreview) Commercial (Shoreview) West Industrial 8-3 Service Business District Light Industrial Plan Evaluation 1. Site Plan Review A. Lot Coverage - No Expected Impact The property currently does not conform to the City requirements for lot coverage and exceeds the allowed impervious surface; however, the addition of this smoking deck does not impact the lot coverage. The proposed addition is located on what is currently a paved surface adjacent to the existing structure. B. Lot Setbacks - Meets Requirements The building currently meets all setback requirements. The proposed smoking deck, while not attached to the building directly, will be located along the same setbacks as the existing structure and will not encroach into the required setback. C. Traffic Impacts - No Expected Impact No significant changes to traffic flow or volume are expected since this application does not include an expansion in restaurant seating capacity or employees. The location for the proposed addition is adjacent to a drive aisle used to access the rear of the building; City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meetingfor December 5, 2007 llAhdocsllAH\AHdatalPlanninglPlanning Cases\2007\07-031 Blue Fox CUP Amendment (PENDING)\120507 - PC Report - Blue Fox CUP Amendment.doc Page 3 of7 however, it is not anticipated that this project will impede traffic flow around the building since it is designed to be in line with the existing structure. D. Landscaping - No Specific Requirements The City does not have specific landscaping requirements for this type of addition; however, the City can require reasonable screening and landscaping through the conditional use permit amendment process. No existing landscaping will be impacted by the proposed smoking deck. E. Parking - No Expected Impact The proposed addition will not impact any existing parking stalls. 2. Additional Review The Building Official submitted his comments addressing this project plan (Attachment 3B- 2). Initially he expressed concerns over the design of the walls and that they do not meet the State requirements for the smoking ban. According to the Building Official, the walls must be at least 50 percent open; however, functionally two of the walls of this structure are the exterior walls of the existing building, thus full walls. The remaining two walls would need to be 100 percent open in order to meet the State requirements. In order to meet State requirements these walls would need to be removed entirely to make the structure 50 percent open. The Public Health Official with the Ramsey County Department of Public Health reviewed the initial plans submitted to the City from the applicant and concurs that they did not meet the State requirements of the Freedom to Breathe Act. In response to this determination, the applicant submitted revised plans that show two fully enclosed walls, one fully open wall (enclosed only with a screen and a fence), and one wall that is half open (Attachment 3B-l). In addition, a portion of the roof is proposed to be open, thus creating a structure that is fifty percent open. These plans have not yet been reviewed by the Public Health Official with Ramsey County, but will need to be approved prior to issuing a building permit. According to the Public Health Official, the State smoking ban would permit screens and fences on open walls. If this CUP Amendment is approved, the applicant will need to build a structure that meets the City's building code and fire code, as well as the State requirements for outdoor smoking areas per the Freedom to Breathe Act. 3. Conditional Use Permit Amendment/Site Plan Review Criteria - Section 1355.04 Snbd 3 City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meetingfor December 5, 2007 \\Ahdocsl\AHlAHdata\PlanningIP/anning Cases\2007107-031 Blue Fox CUP Amendment (PENDING)\! 20507 - PC Report - Blue Fox CUP Amendment.doc Page 4 of 7 Section 1355.04 Subd 3 of the Arden Hills Zoning Code lists the criteria for evaluating a Conditional Use Permit. When evaluating conditional use permits, the Planning Commission and City Council should consider the effect of the proposed use upon the health, safety, convenience and general welfare of the owners and occupants ofthe surrounding land, in particular, and the community as a whole, in general, including but not limited to the following factors: 1. Existing and anticipated traffic and parking conditions; 2. Noise, glare, odors, vibration, smoke, dust, air pollution, heat, liquid or solid waste, and other nuisance characteristics; 3. Drainage; 4. Population density; 5. Visual and land use compatibility with uses and structures on surrounding land; adjoining land values; 6. Park dedications where applicable; and the 7. Orderly development of the neighborhood and the City within the general purpose and intent ofthis ordinance and the Comprehensive Development Plan for the City. Findinl!s of Fact Staff offers the following thirteen findings offact for the Planning Commission's consideration: GeneralJ?indings: 1. The applicant is proposing to construct a 140 square foot, partially enclosed, smoking deck adjacent to the existing structure. 2. The Blue Fox Bar and Grill is a Conditional Use in the B-3 zone 3. Exterior changes to the property require an amendment to the original Conditional Use Permit. 4. While the property exceeds lot coverage limits, the proposed smoking deck does not impact the lot coverage on the site. 5. The proposed smoking deck meets all setback requirements. 6. The proposed smoking deck will not have an impact on any landscaping or green space within the site. 7. The proposed smoking deck does not meet the State requirement that the walls be a total of at least 50 percent open. On the Conditional Use Permit Amendment: 8. The proposed smoking deck is not expected to have any significant impact on traffic or parking conditions. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meetingfor December 5. 2007 \\Ahdocs/IAHlAHdatalPlanning\P/anning Cases\2007\07-031 Blue Fox CUP Amendment (PENDING)\120507. PC Report - Blue Fox CUP Amendmenl.doc Page 5of7 9. The proposed smoking deck will not produce any significant noise, glare, odors, vibration, smoke, dust, air pollution, heat, liquid, or solid waste that would impact adjacent properties. Temporary noise and dust may be created during construction. 10. The smoking deck will not impact any drainage on the site. 11. The proposed smoking deck will not have any impacts on population density. 12. The park dedication fee is not applicable to this application. 13. The proposed building does not conflict with the City's Comprehensive Plan or the intent ofthe Zoning Code. Notice Notice was published in the Arden Hills/Shoreview Bulletin and notice was prepared by the City and mailed to residents within three-hundred fifty (350) feet ofthe subject property. Resident Comments Staff has not received any letters, e-mails, or telephone calls from property owners or occupants in regards to this planning case, Staff Recommendation While the submitted plans do not conform to State requirements for outdoor smoking areas, the plans do appear to be in conformance with all other City criteria for a CUP Amendment. The applicant has agreed to modify the plans to be in conformance with State requirements for outdoor smoking areas, which simply involves removing the solid half walls on the two sides and replacing the walls with a railing for safety purposes. According to State requirements, the applicant can install screens instead of walls. Since the visibility of the deck from Lexington Avenue is minimal, Staff does not have any objections to the proposal. If the Planning Commission recommends approval of Planning Case #07-031, Staff recommends the following six conditions: 1. The applicant shall continue to abide by the conditions of all previous permits and reviews. 2. The project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted as amended by the conditions of approval. Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission. 3. Building Permit Plans shall be submitted to the Building Official a minimum of two (2) weeks before the planned start of construction. 4. Submitted plans must be completed and signed by a licensed Engineer or Architect prior to the issuance of any building permits. 5. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall submit plans that comply with all City building code requirements, fire code requirements, and all State City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for December 5, 2007 \lAhdocsllAHlAHdatalPlanninglPlanning Cases\2007\07.031 Blue Fox CUP Amendment (PENDING)\120507 - PC Report - Blue Fox CUP Amendment.doc Page 6 of7 requirements of the Freedom to Breathe Act, including that the walls be at least 50 percent open. 6. The applicant shall post signs on the deck and on the door to the deck that clearly prohibit taking alcoholic beverages onto the deck. Failure to put up the required signs may result in the revocation ofthis conditional use permit amendment and/or revocation ofthe City's liquor license. This condition may be rescinded ifthe City adopts a liquor ordinance amendment that permits the consumption of alcoholic beverages outside of the currently permitted areas. Options & Proposed Motion Lanl!ual!e 1. Recommend Approval with Conditions: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 07-031 for a Conditional Use Permit Amendment at 3833 Lexington Avenue based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans as amended by the six conditions in the December 5, 2007, planning case report. 2. Recommend Approval as Submitted: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 07- 031 for a Conditional Use Permit Amendment at 3833 Lexington Avenue based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans in the December 5, 2007, planning case report. 3. Recommend Denial: Motion to recommend denial of Planning Case 07-031 for a Conditional Use Permit Amendment at 3833 Lexington Avenue based on the following findings: findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial and why those reasons cannot be mitigated. 4. Table: Motion to table Planning Case 07-031 for a Conditional Use Permit Amendment at 3833 Lexington A venue: a specific reason and information request should be included with a motion to table. Deadline for Al!encv Actions The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on November 5, 2007. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statutes, the City must act on this request by January 4, 2007 (60 days), unless the city provides the petitioner with written reasons 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. Attachments 3B-l Project description and site plans City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meetingfor December 5, 2007 \lAhdocsl\AH\AHdata\P/anningIPlanning Cases\2007\07~031 Blue Fox CUP Amendment (PENDING)\] 20507 - PC Report - Blue Fox CUP Amendment.doc Page 7 of 7 3B-2 3B-3 Building Official review Area map, air photo and pictures of the site City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meetingfor December 5, 2007 \\AhdocsllAH\AHdatalPlanningIPlanning Cases\2007\07-031 Blue Fox CUP Amendment (PENDING)\120507 - PC Report w Blue Fox CUP Amendment.doc Page 8 of 7 Attachment 3 B-1 Project Description and Site Plans ~ ~HILLS December 5, 2007, Planning Commission Meeting ~. ~~}iILLS 1245 West Highway 96 Arden Hills, Minnesota 55112 Telephone (651) 792~7800 Fax (651) 634-5137 www.ci.arden-hills.mn.us -- - - --- '[ Planning Case No. Submittal Date I Application Completed Date i Accepted by II Receipt Number Council Decision L9olJ,:!cll Deci,t'lon [).!'Jlf>c-.__ 07- 03\ I I jJitdJ O"'L~' 1\i.l':1/.f:>..J_~-f IM~. i I ---~~ I I ! 2007 LAND USE APPLICATION - '--.-,,'--:.~------ Applicant InformatiQn , Apolicsnt: wlmrnssaclc _Address: ~\ E\I Qd < L\1H-e C9-VJOlc) C<,.,., m N CO~I {7 Telephon~_!'I.o,:_(06j'. aOf'l{-t::;q7 6 I Other:___, ",',_________.___.__ Fax No.: ttJ6J -lJ::f3L:O d:fB O'~:r--' ._~J:11ail ~cldr.(3-~~J ('/)S0'(1('"('@ AD/malj, C (HY") Prc:mertv Inf(mnatioi'l . /_' . _ Property Owner Vue'? ,cro '{!lY1tf LLL..!." ,~____" ,_ , Owner Address: as fB Lex:n. -/~_/1!., 'c/er7~-;;/lS'//ht\lJS5Id0 Owner Telephone f::I.2~ju5/ - q:f.k3 --rOom I Other: ....~;.,,\~ "J.!.li~ :';:~;," :f7,-I/+rl/:{J' "::/' m j, !r-.~/- Address ot prop'e~tVJnval~ecJ:,~~:33'. L.e.,!-i~~,j I'-J' M'I L'Jft: r.' y 11~_~/fV c:,,'t:JI"-Tlf' _l<lRaLQesC'J"j)JiQO~, ?ee. ne~F PC( ~ " ~_ , Property IDNo,: 0<7<)0, ~ 3 , ~' W~ Type of ~s~: re$iyrq~r:it;f btN:tL' ; {l(l'li -~'!,--"!.,-G(}[l1{)J rrc { {,z/ t., ,..,.. _~_.L_2e..erty~(;reag,,:,~CZ8 (~? (7 j.~f:. 'Type of Request" o Apportionment of Assessments ($30) o Comprehensive Plan Amendment ($400) 1ill Conditional Use Permit or Amended CUP ($300) o Final Plat ($200 + $25 per lot) .. I:J Final Planned Unit Development ($200) (J Master Planned Unit Development ($600 ... escrow) o Minor Subdivision (Jot spliVconsolidation) ($300) I:J Preliminary Plat ($400 + $25 per lot + escrow) I:J Rezoning ($400) It..I .'lit" !"Ia, , R"VlUW ($400) I:J Site Plan Review (Sign or Fence) ($250) I:J Vacation of Easement or Right-ot-Way ($250 ... escrow) o Variance (Zoning Code) ($300) I:J Zoning Code Amendment ($300 + escrow) Reyised: 0 t. 30 07 Fag\; 1 ur3 'Applicants are responsible for-' reimbursement of consultant fees associated with filing, reviewing, and processing o( ihis application Such tees are to be paid in escrow up front 01' upon receipt of statement from the City of Arden Hills. Fees inClude costs tor consultants retained by the City and include consultant planning services, attorney, and engineer. 'Payment of park dedication fees are required with the approval of most subdivision applications. 'The land use application fees do not cover building, sign, or other permit fees that may be required upon approval of a land use application. 'Certain applications are subject to review and approval by the Rice Creek Watershed District. Contact RCWD directly at 763-398- 3070 for additional information. Brief Description of Request (R1~1i!se e!so include a tvped,"d..l,aJled leU;;!' ;;xpl..ining,Jb~Qjectl: /0 fl' I \' I' _ , J /r, ," ~':\; i:t C\.., ,~ f'VI () !(M ,. I)"CI( 6 t-\ /In,), (0(,1.e:;- ,...- , < J ", ,? '/ r=. or i? ~i/d(,;~1 4/d.'l rIJOJ. - ~ ke([~l d~sehDhOn~ Se(1)[)n 'dl .J::i;:l.i,- ,.... ( ,- l"\ .l "',., ':'\-' '~..D I < jn t-: 01-" O~ T'l r-it l'J c:::{ f("\ d ! .;- ! }. ----j-r,., v\', P 'f 1/"\ 'LV-' '\/~'! ":'In . ," ,- ..--' 0.( I' ~ "lttDr, ('\ r::- '-30 ~ i , 1/.-/ f'-f ~" - - t '""- f L ~ kl.tncA,c: .~ r 'I) I 't J'p-, t'C ~ " 1!! L;" ~ ... -. _=",..",-e-';r '-,.,d'-' " FilinG & information ReQuirements '"the City requests th8t you make 8 pre-application meeting \i\!ith the C!lY Pi8nner to DISCUSS the application process, raqUirements, and deadlines. Unless waived by tM City F'lanner or F'lannlng Commission, a certified survey of th~ prop~rty is requif~d for ~!i applicEltkms, The Planning Commission and/or City Council rnd~f stHi require 8 certified survey. A checkiist for other required Inforrl1atlofl IS B!Sb available. CompleteJincompiete Applications An incomplete application will delay the processing of 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 ihat the application is complete. A decision on whether the appHc-atlon is complete or Incomplete shaH be rnade \vlthin fifteen (15) vvorking days folloV'.tlng the s:ubn-lltt;;ll Of tho (~ppiic;;ition- VVr-lGf) tile dpplic~tion is deBmecJ to be "complde" it shall be piaced on the agenda: of the first possible Planning COllimis$km meeting provided that all required public notices have been sent and published M_~._.._,,-1. _I: r___ ~~V~Ht:-Ht t.H rti'~~ The undersigned acknowledges that she/he understands that before a land use applicallon can be deemed complete. all required information and fees (including all deposits) must be paid to the City. If additional feeS 6fe reqUIred to cover costs incurred 5y me CltYl itle CIty Planner rrGls tht ngm to "[eqUjr~ addlllonal payment from one or 1l10re of tr,e ullClerslgned, whO shall be Jointly liable for sucll fees. Sucll expenses may include (but are not limited to) direct city payro!! and overhead costs, fees paid to consUltai'HS: SilO otller professiOnalS, gna me cost Of printing, maifing, Hnd supplies, The City may WlH11)Oid W)~J action on a lalld use appliCatiOn, withhold building pennjts, and/or rescind prior acHon until all misc€iHaneous fees have been paid. Applicants are adVised ir-lat an escrow deposit is required at the tirne of th~ ~ubrnltt;]1 of tho land usa appHc~tiojJ to offset Costs associated 'Nah the pfoposed pl'bjed Unused portions of an escrow are returned to the applicant upon successful irnplernentatioi1 of an ;;>1ppro'.'cd plan. Notice of MeetinCl Attendance In order for the Planning Commission and the City Council to consider any appiicatlon, the applicant or a designated representative must be present at the scheduled meeting, If not. the matter may be tabled until the next 3v31!ab!e agenda, Revised: 0 t -30-07 Pag.e 2 01'3 01-1g-2001 20:23 TOM COSSRCK 2395957988 Nov 04 07 02,31p JIm Co..ack 661 - '!Ell - 028U PAGE -3 p.:a !aenda Deadline and Meetlno S~h.crluk .n. UMQI.m1 tvr 6IIDm.1Iai ot Ii1m1lI6t <lPpitCol>lJOIIII 1$ leqUll'eU ac<:oro.n; to \110 achEKlulll ouU.~ ijOIOW. 1"0"'" '''' "" "x""pllonl\. P1:l!'\l'iINl C.,mml~',:M m"",llnl1< ;1m !VllJt~!!v M!~ nn 1M nf!:t W...n...n<n~v nf ~;;~ch rn()l'\:lJ ,':l 1:00 PM. t~()t:O~ ;')!r::1~~ r.n~~:c::t C:~i' !o{,:!! to vcnty th(~ Jnf.,mtinrl d:ltn- ;1nd timo, (';rty GllW:~:!~ fm"l\.l\i"w:.. .,11'\1 huid tWTvully ilw ,,,,,,I Monduy Qf tho OijllHJ m\JuUi t.l~ 7,00 F'M. MuuiiuY'i ~ru hui,j if! lhv ~a"nr.lI C"MI!ll'f' At t"", Cil'} of Ard~m HUI~, 174'$ W(,~t HiIll1Wl1Y 1)13, Afl:1n" HKI~. M;""~""f,, S!l~~~. t:l1!e!},!i (:.ri~N\VI~(> ~tnt<,-e, A~llhe:'n.!1i :~r{':' ~ittV:i:!~~! !!~;':! ~Y.itN!0l1~1! n'r~C~lr;~r. ;mr!!0l'" ',~.'tJrf.-:-;r~~);~;~. :i:'(' &,ri6!!i,.I:W WI'jGti li~es~ery UpGil aj.!lH'vVa; or U\:; IJ1~"rHfiC ~1~wiuMlon, 20117 SCHEOUl.e ('6111.if<101 IiI r:11.-.IIO(1) APPl.ICATlON OEADl.INE OAT,," r'f..,'.,.....M:-"..r 4 .,?OOl'i} "'''1l1tY 8 .. J, ,..._,-~-~~..~~,._~.- " TENTATIVE i PLANNINO i (;QMMI$$ION . M~~TING' i (Gene<'IIlly I1el4 on mt ; :,t'ki Wi01fiMlo;t1i4 ...f 1;:';1) ~.m'. ~ ~ ii /. i ,. TSNTATIVE CITY COUNCil. MIiETfNG DATE' (GeflllfallY nOlO on me ;...:4: MHI""i~ ~l r.O~j ).1'11.. r ..:. """",:.;,~. '::) ~ ',~ ~.".:..::.~..: .:....:; ....' ~ ! ,~\ ,,',~...'!\, '..'~ ___ "~.!..._..._~..,._ '- ".. "_d'!'..,~''!!l.~ ...,......__! ......_~,~~ ,:."1...........".....,.,.,,... "i.,....."......,...---....--'.::~.:I..:::~~"C~._.... ....... ._"', . Alii;! L..___.__....__ ;5___...." ,~)(il :\0.., ' MiOVl!. '.', '" , , . MllY~_. ..... ' ,1;;1\, .; .t';~~~~I~~.~I~..f~::..r~ t J.~~.~,~7 .. , ."" .-. "'Aiiijuii"-'---"'-,!,--'" AI.IQU~I?1 ,...,. ,;,. "~o~~~n'lgl;,~;,, = ~\;J:*;,_i.~:A;; .;;t;. ()et(li:l~r :J ~ <'\~lolX'r 2J) ....."........, '1.......'_..._...'...'._....__......................'h.. .4,. . fJi;)wrnoor ., _ ~rol.'~mhlJ!~ ~c Deoember6 .. " i''---.-~"\*jo:.:-:=_.. "I J"fl."'Y:/ (;lWl:ll "._...:!',~~\I."(U~~ 1:'llOP.l - . - ......~.. .,.~,.;: ',I ~h5 ~ Aiin/2, . ~3v'l j .;~~::r .: .J~Iji.t:.....l ._"tn;G.c.~.~ . ;'_ Ii i'" ". . ......&l!R~!1~.!~--i-.. ~o..,.rll .. . !~,... "....,,_....~.!y..!!i!!;t.G-.. .._i . ... Decl.',!lbCt.:I ; ~ I . :~9~~i.j.o\':~~i.~~j.l(tiJJ5'!)tand Sigf)r:.t~;fC : i1i::r.nn'wvlr;c:cr: ;ri;lll hilVi: ri';;.ir:l ;:1: 0; Ihn inform/Irion ji;.;tr;(; it; fh;~ r.ily i1f Ati;rri : ml:~ T ..nd Unt. ;\rlplir..:lhl,'i;'; ;,,:(; :; ,i'li :("'-"./,'];" 1 lb!,~ : . <l; i ;,' ...;"" i .:i1,;~; f;-.,,- .,,~.; ,s;;..r',', ;r;i~l\i f'-'iC! rij' '.i'iP ".-,;.~l',.".! !'-d d ;.; \4; '-J;='~'';;.'~i;;~;i v;' Ult.~ijfjfjh 'n, /7/1 2 /'. /7 / " / jj-f,-tJ7 PM~ Ar~~~II~) .... .. !'l..... .--1 /,~./I //" '~,I'/ "" // //-0."'" .~!'r...~- ~nfSign;;fl;;' (If d'il'i~~l !?t:ori m~ property OWn"r) ., 1/ /i:/ h7 '63ii.I.~-'("'--'" r':j,":",i. (:/'tidl,,'i iI" (;:1] P!/\I'fll" ,t! {L\tj '!{~':-\,'lrl'; P( !"'i ',"1':1;! :!j; ",,,.,, !,_.f".:,;_,n.~/,,; ",\", :,:n,. ,',' '.' you h3VCl My qUlIO"""" 11lS....ClH1S lh.. ""IlI....lXln, AiJtiNk.'miJ l,ii}jjitis or !ljre jifJiJ/k:iitrvn tWirl ,uv ~iv.u!Jb-1tl Uff Ii,u l:iti"~ wubdiu: him 'j/WiJ;h,J Gi nmon..niii.. in" iiS I. .il.'l";''-:' {J; _ l;J.-~J. : 'rI~" .,,, ; ~1-19-2BB1 28'18 TG~ COSSACK 2395967988 pA~--3 To: Arden Hills Planning Commission From: Jim Cossack Date: November 4, 2007 Re: Smoking deck at Blue Fox Bar and Grill 1. OVERVIEW The Project has already been started; the deck and 47" walls are roughed in. We apologies for starting prior to obtaining a building permit, but were unaware ofthe need for a permit on decks not connected to the main building and not exceeding 32 inches in height. from ground. Due to the Minnesota Indoor Smoking Ban the Blue Fox Bar and Grill has had to take the following steps for adherence to the new law and for the comfort and safety ofits patrons. 1. Ban Smoking inside the building 2. Construct a contained yet open area for smoking patrons to smoke cigarettes etc. This wilI avoid any problems that would arise if all smoking patrons were to simply stand outside the front entrance creating congestion at the building entrance and an eyesore to Lexington Ave. II. CONSTRUCTION PLANS . Construct a deck with half open walls to meet the state requirements for the smoking ban. . Cover said deck with a roofto offer some protection from the elements for the patrons. . The deck and roof are NOT attached to the existing building at any point and is considered a freestanding structure. · Standard decking and roofing materials are to be used in its construction and finished to blend in with existing building as close as possible. · Site chosen is not final solution to smokers issue but will get us by till next year when plans for a bigger better smoking area are being looked at for the south side of building. · Project Should be completed 2 weeks from permit issue date. III. Details 1. see attached worksheet for a artist's rendering of proposed smoking area. 2. See attachment 2 for plan view. ~ >.;: ..0(1) - > 00 ...- I+- ro 0 ,+-0 o~ c: ~ .2 co ;t.;:CD "0"- "'Coo <:(0) c: "'C . - Q).:::t:. m. 0 o E c..w o - ~..q- 0......- I ci. e "- € 0. " .E . Q> "" ",. Iii i oe ~ e z o .' o '" ':9 o GI ~ @ q ~ @ q ~ @ q o .' '" '>-- Q> ~ ~ Q> " 0. <i - "' ~ .E 10 a N ji o " ,u "'ll :' ~.. ,<;Q "" ~ t:l IS! t: it :r ~ i. CO') .." ii:~ r$ il '" Ii /l" ~ ~ gp ;Q ~ := '" ~'"d _~b ....00 ~ ~N ~ ~;S ~~<rl ~ 0 t ~ .~'S <l.) > <l.) ;:I ~ i> .....$0<0 ~(:lZ ~ :5T '"", ~;& 'iJA ~ ~F' '." _s-,"-:' '- ' '.ffE~ ' \. '.-'7-.......~...... 1t." . - '.. \:) ,~ /..~."~- ~t ~ j'; _._-"^~. , . '. i/Jtr" " , .~ ... Attachment 3B-2 Building Official Review ~ ~HILLS December 5, 2007, Planning Commission Meeting Plan Review Comments Page 1 of 1 ~ ~HILLS Plan Review Comments 11/14/07 Blue Fox Inn Smokin Deck Addition 3833 Lexin ton Avenue PC #07-031 - Conditional Use Permit Amendment Comments . The plan submitted does not appear to meet the minimum requirements for walls to be 50% open. The deck is abutting two existing walls that would not provide ventilation, Therefore, the two remaining walls would need to be 100% open in order to meet the requirement for a minimum 50% open. . Plans should be submitted to the Ramsey County health Dept. for review and approval. . A building permit can not be issued without a letter of approval from the Dept. of Health and Lake Johanna Fire Dept. . Plans are inadequate for a building permit review. Plans will be required to be completed and signed by a licensed Engineer or Architect. Dave Scherbel Building Official, City of Arden Hills Office; 651-634-5123 Fax; 651-634-5137 dave.scherbel@ci.arden-hills.mn.us Attachment 3B-3 Area Map, Air Photo, and Photographs of the Site ~ ~HiLLS December 5, 2007, Planning Commission Meeting =- ~ ~ ~ ~ .. -< ~ = = ~ i> -< = <= ..... OJ) = .... ~ ~ ~ l"l l"l !Xl l"l , ~ 'I, t~,&f ~ ~ tM11 tQE$;;'* ~ ~ U " o ~ " " i:i5 ~ . . - o '0 o - .s ~ o o N 'E <: ~~ o ~ '~.i><<l E ~r-g '@~~ ._ ~ II> "re-e 'Oo~ 80. a e~] ~~~ r=.::l S .g ~ IS ~.s8 S'].s 0" 00" :.z~ ';;'3 t a'~-e .~~ ~ '" ~-~ g]~" ""~ . . " 'g~] :g] i:t . -- ~,., 00 ....:.0 0 -g~o ~ ,.,- O. 2:;;"'0 .S 0 a oa"ii 000 .!!l::l<3 '00 g~ d ~] 6 ~.u "'~.s ~~~ 000 O_N 1#'~~ E'ON "'d~t .'O~ ]g~ 0"0 ~ ~.. 6"'.6 ~~C5 -0. .80 t ~ ~ ,s.!;'. .~ ~j .:a 6] p;5f-< . > - :.5b ~]~~ ..~O\ ~2~ :::EB~ <~~ ti 0 en is !i o u . ~ '" 0; ~ " o en Q, ~ ::?j CIJ ..... .... rJl CIJ = = CIJ .. -< = o ..... ell = .... ~ CIJ ~ l"l l"l 00 l"l ~ " 13 "'Cl " 13 ~ "-< ;:J U K o ~ " ;:l @ ] " " ~ '0 o " ..2 ~ o o N ." ] d 5 ..g .~~] Eoc 'E ~~ .- 0 0 "'e-.... a 5.] ~~] 'o~~ ;::~ a .g e a ~.s 8 '0."1:;1_ SotS 8~b :]~ .- 0 .... 0._ " "..0 ~] ~ .- 0:1 .. ~ .~ " ~ .. l::O.s 0"" " ..'0 . . . "d2-e " " 0 ~.s ~ .0" .8~ 0 ]lae ]ft"1:;l i::i3; .- 0 '0 !3"ii ;::: 0 e .~ :: <<l ]..2l <<l (5 3 "'00 taU ~~.g ~l:6S 000 "_N 0." . E~~ -0] i:i "'0.0 ]1il~ ~89. ~~ ~ - .0 ~€o ..2;::lfl 0:1 8 ;::: ]~~ '~'~j .~ 5] !t"tal-, a~t::' .~~g ~!lN~ 0::r1~ Ul.Sl1J :EE:!.o <~~ ..J 0 U ~ S 3 o u ~ a <:! '" ~ o ~ ~ o ....l bI) <=: :Q ... "" ro... S ~ ..c: ~ ;:l o VJ bI) <=: :Q o o ....l x o "- "0 <!j i>:: S o <./:: <=: .S ~ '6 "0 --< "0 <!j en o 0.. o ... ro... en "0 [;:; :s o f- ..c: ~ ;:l o VJ bI) <=: :Q"O o "" o 0 ....li>:: ... = ~ 8 "0 = ~ 8 < ~ ~ ~ U ~ 0 0 ....l ....l bI) Ii< bI) <=: 0 <=: :g ~ :g "" "" ro... ~ ro... S = S 0 - 0 <./:: ~ <./:: ~ ~ '" ..... '" <!j "" :s ('f') <!j ..c: ..c: 0 ~ ~ ;:l ;:l I 0 0 t- VJ VJ 0 bI) bI) <=: <=: ::J:t: :Q :Q U 0 0 0 0 ~ ....l ....l ~ ~HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: December 05, 2007 PC Agenda Item 3. C TO: Planning Commission Meagan Beekman, Planner I ~ FROM: SUBJECT: Planning Case #: 07-025 Recreational Vehicle Zoning Code Amendment City of Arden Hills ATTACHMENT: 3C-l Proposed Recreational Vehicles, Utility Trailers, and Watercraft Outdoor Storage Ordinance - December 5, 2007 Requested Action Based on the outcome of the RV work session, the Planning Commission may choose to approve, deny or table the proposed RV ordinance. Backl!round In May 2007, Staff was directed by the Planning Commission and the City Council to examine the current zoning code regarding recreation vehicles. Staff was asked to clarify the definitions used for "recreational vehicle" as well as the methodology for measuring "length" and "height" of RVs. The primary goal of this amendment is to clarify the definitions and build consistency within the RV code, A draft of a revised RV code was proposed in May; however, the project was delayed for additional research. In response to the Council and Planning Commission's request, Staff analyzed the current code and reviewed codes from fifteen other communities in the metropolitan area. Comments and discussion were elicited from other City Staff, including the code enforcement officer and the building official. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meetingfor December5, 2007 \\AhdocsllAHlAHdataIPlanningIPianning Cases\2007\07-025 RV Regulations Zoning Amendment (PC Tabled)\120507 ~ PC Report - Rv Regulations.doc Page 1 of3 A proposed RV ordinance was drafted and presented to the Planning Commission at the October 3, 2007, Planning Commission meeting. At that meeting, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to table the RV ordinance so staff could do additional research and clarify certain aspects ofthe proposed code. A work session was held prior to the November 7, 2007, meeting to further discuss specific regulations and concerns raised by the Commissioners at the October 3, 2007, meeting. Some discussion took place and additional questions were raised. At the November 7, 2007 regular Planning Commission Meeting, another public hearing was held and the Planning Commission voted unanimously to again table the RV ordinance. A second work session was held prior to the October 5, 2007 meeting to give staff a chance to present an updated proposed ordinance and to further discuss the concerns raised by the Commissioners. No official action or decisions can be made at a work session meeting. At this time, the Planning Commission may choose to approve the proposed RV ordinance with the changes discussed at the work session, deny the ordinance, or table it for additional research and review. Options and Motion Lanl!ual!e 1. Recommend Approval (with Commission Chanf!es): Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 07-025 to amend the Recreational Vehicle Ordinance Section, 1325.10 of the Zoning Code, as presented in the December 5, 2007, planning case report (with changes) 2. Recommend Denial: Motion to recommend denial of Planning Case 07-025 to amend the Recreational Vehicle Ordinance as proposed in the December 5, 2007, planning case report (recommending denial should include specific reasons). 3. Table: Motion to table Planning Case 07-025 to amend the Recreational Vehicle Ordinance as proposed in the December 5, 2007, planning case report for the following reasons... A change to the Zoning Code requires a public hearing before the Planning Commission and approval from 4/5 of the City Council. The Zoning Code change would go into effect upon publication in the official City newspaper. Notice Notice was published in the Shoreview-Arden Hills Bulletin. Staff has received a few e-mails and telephone calls from property owners or occupants in regard to this planning case, in addition to those received at the October 3, 2007 and November 7, 2007 Planning Commission meeting. These have been included in the December 5, 2007 Work Session Packet. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meetingfor December5, 2007 llAhdocsllAH\AHdatalPlanning\Planning Cases\2007\07~025 RV Regulations Zoning Amendment (PC Tabled)\120507 - PC Report - Rv Regulations.doc Page 2 of3 Deadline for Al!encv Actions There are no deadlines for action on this request. Attachment Proposed Recreational Vehicle, Utility Trailer, and Watercraft Outdoor Storage Ordinance - December 5, 2007 City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meetingfor December5, 2007 \lAhdocsl\AH1AHdataIP/anning\Planning Cases\2007\07-025 RV Regulations Zoning Amendment (PC Tabled)\J20507 - PC Report - Rv Regulations.doc Page 3 of3 Attachment 3 C-l Proposed Recreational Vehicles, Utility Trailers, and Watercraft Outdoor Storage Ordinance - December 5, 2007 ~ ~HrLLS December 5, 2007, Planning Commission Meeting December 5, 2007 Proposed Recreational Vehicle, Utility Trailer and, Watercraft Outdoor Storage Ordinance Definitions: Subd. 136 Recreational Vehicles and Utility Trailers. Vehicles or trailers for recreational or utilitarian uses that can be driven, towed, or hauled. This includes, but is not limited to, those vehicles commonly referred to as RVs, such as motor homes and travel trailers, as well as any snowmobile, pull camper, all terrain vehicle (ATV), tent trailer, special purpose trailer, utility trailer used for hauling, or other similar vehicle. A recreational vehicle(s) such as an ATV on a trailer shall constitute one recreational vehicle. For the purposes of this code recreational vehicles and trailers are collectively referred to as "RVs" Watercraft. Water-oriented vehicles and their trailers including, but not limited to, power boats, cruisers, jet skies, fishing/hunting boats, pontoon boats, as well as, row boats, sail boats, and other non-motorized craft with greater than two person capacity. This definition excludes non- motorized one and two person crafts such as canoes, kayaks, and paddle boats. Height, RV and Watercraft. The height of an RV or watercraft shall be measured from the ground to the highest point of the structure not including antennas and utility/mechanical systems provided they are accessory and take up no more than ten (I 0) percent of the roof surface area. Length, RV and Watercraft. The length of an RV or watercraft shall be measured from end to end including any hitch or motor. For the purposes of measuring length, an R V or watercraft on a trailer will be measured as one vehicle. 1325.10 Recreational Vehicle, Utility Trailer and, Watercraft Outdoor Storage. The unregulated outside parking and outside storage of recreational vehicles, utility trailers, and watercraft within a residential use district or accessory to a residential use is found to create a nuisance, hazard and detrimental influence upon the public health, safety and general welfare of the community by obstructing the view on streets and on private property, bringing noise and odors into residential areas, creating cluttered and otherwise unsightly areas, preventing the full use of residential streets for residential parking, reducing the useable open space of streets and private property and otherwise adversely affecting residential property values and neighborhood maintenance and improvement. Subd.1 General Regulations for RV's and Watercraft in All Districts. A. Storage in an Enclosed Structure. RVs and Watercraft of any height or length may be kept within an enclosed structure provided the structure conforms to the underlying zoning requirements of the district. B. Attachment to Ground Not Permitted. RVs and Watercraft shall not be permanently affixed to the ground in a manner that would prevent removal. RVs and Watercraft not permitted to be operated on public streets shall be placed on or in a trailer or motor vehicle. C. Use of RVs and Watercraft. No RV or watercraft shall be used for temporary or permanent living, sleeping or housekeeping purposes in the City. RVs and watercraft shall not be connected to sewer, water, or other utility for any period of time, unless otherwise permitted in Subd. 3B of this ordinance. D. Condition While Stored. All RVs and watercraft shall be stored or parked in a secure, safe, orderly, and well-maintained condition that does not inhibit emergency vehicle access to any property. All RVs and watercraft shall be currently licensed and operable at all times while being stored. E. Ownership. Permitted storage shall only be allowed for RVs and watercraft owned by the owner or occupant of the property on which the RV and watercraft are stored. F. No RV or watercraft shall be permitted on a vacant lot without a primary structure unless in conformance with Section 1325.11. Subd.2 Permitted RV and Watercraft Storage. Storing RVs and watercraft outside of an enclosed building or structure is permitted in all residential districts provided that all of the following provisions are met: A. No more than three (3) RV's or watercraft may be stored outside on a residential lot. No more than one (I) of the three (3) RV's maybe a self-propelled motor home, travel trailer, camper, or other similar type ofRV. 2 B. R V s and watercraft stored outside shall not be more than twenty-eight (28) feet in length or twelve (12) feet in height. C. One (1) self-propelled motor home, travel trailer, camper, or other similar type ofRV that is greater than twenty-eight (28) feet, but not larger than thirty-four (34) feet, in length is permitted in the rear yard of a property provided that all of the following criteria are met: 1. The R V meets all setback regulations in this section; 2. The rear yard is fully enclosed by a privacy fence; and 3. The RV is parked on an improved surface. D. RVs and watercraft shall not be placed within the principal structure side yard setback and shall be at least ten (10) feet from any rear property lines. If both side and rear yards are available for parking or storage, then the location with the least visibility from streets and neighboring property, as determined by the Zoning Administrator, shall be used for such storage. E. On any lot, RVs and watercraft shall not be stored closer to the front property line than the principle structure or attached garage. Additionally, in the case of corner lots the RV shall not be stored closer to the property line than the principle structure or attached garage in the side yard adjacent to the street. F. Any RV or watercraft that is stored outdoors shall not be placed closer to the principle building of an adjoining lot than to the principle building on the lot where it is stored. G. RVs and watercraft stored in the side yard and visible from the public right-of-way shall be screened with a privacy fence or landscaping of similar opacity as determined by the Zoning Administrator, unless they are kept on an improved hard surface. H. Alternative locations for storing an RV or watercraft on a property will be permitted by the Zoning Administrator with an administrative permit for up to one (1) RV or watercraft, when topographic conditions or lot configuration do not allow for the normal location regulations to be met and all of the following criteria are met: 1. Depending on lot configuration, the Zoning Administrator will determine where on the lot is most appropriate for RV or watercraft storage. 2. The R V or watercraft is at least three feet from the side or rear property line; 3. The R V or watercraft shall not be stored forward of the principal structure 3 Graphic Storage Location Summary. No part of the RV shall be outside of the permitted RV storage area described in the above section and displayed in the below graphics. R-2 40' 5 feet . Principle Structure Side Yard Setback R~1 10 feet R-3 5 feel 40' 40' Property Line Curb~ Street ~;!Jr~I~1M-t~I!1 Permn1ed RV Parking Ii Subd.3 Short-Term RV and Watercraft Parking in Residential Districts A. Short-Term Parking without Permit. Licensed and operable RVs and watercraft of any length or height may be parked in driveways for the sole expressed purpose of loading, unloading, and cleaning for a period not to exceed seventy-two (72) hours, provided that they are not within fifteen (15) feet of the curb, and are not within five (5) feet of a side property line. B. Short-Term Parking with Permit. Administrative Permits for a period of up to seven (7) days, renewable once during a twelve (12) month period, may be obtained from City Hall that would permit a licensed and operable RV or watercraft to park in the driveway, provided it is not within fifteen (15) feet of the curb, and is not within five (5) feet of a side property line. This permit would allow a motor home or other similar vehicle to be connected to water and electricity. Subd. 4 Shoreline Residential Lots. A. In addition to the other permitted RV and watercraft storage in Section 1325.10 Subd 2, the owner or occupant of any shoreline lot is permitted to store two (2) additional watercraft. 4 B. RVs shall not be permitted within fifty (50) feet of the Ordinary High Water (OHW) mark on any property. C. Watercraft shall not be permitted within ten (10) feet of the OHW mark on any property and shall meet the principal structure side setback. If topographical conditions prohibit storing the watercraft at least ten (10) feet from the OHW mark, the Zoning Administrator may grant an administrative permit to allow watercraft storage closer than ten (10) from the OHW mark. Graphic Storage Location Summary. No part of the RV shall be outside of the permitted RV storage area described in the above section and displayed in the below graphics. .. PrinCiple Structure Side Yard Setback R-1 10 feet R-2 5 feet R-3 5 feet 40' Property Line Curb~ Street Permitted RV Parking Permitted Water-Oriented RV Parking 5 ~ ~HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: December 05, 2007 Work Session TO: Planning Commission Meagan Beekman, Planner I ~ FROM: SUBJECT: Planning Case #: 07-025 - Recreational Vehicle, Utility Trailer, and Watercraft Work Session ATTACHMENTS: 1. Proposed Recreational Vehicles, Utility Trailers, and Watercraft Outdoor Storage Ordinance - December 5,2007 2. RV Codes from Surronnding Communities 3. Public Comments Requested Action Please review and consider the attached Recreational Vehicle, Utility Trailer, and Watercraft Ordinance and provide feedback to staff. The Commission can not take formal action at a work session. Proposed Chanl!es This memo highlights the changes that have been made to the proposed ordinance since the November 7th work session. Title and Definitions The title of the proposed ordinance has been changed from the "RV Ordinance" to the "Recreational Vehicle, Utility Trailer, and Watercraft Outdoor Storage Ordinance". The purpose of this change was to assist the Enforcement Officers in educating the public by clarifying what was regulated by the ordinance. In keeping with the title of the ordinance, the definitions were amended to more clearly define what is meant by the terms "Recreational Vehicle and Utility Trailer" and City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Work Session for December 5, 2007 \lAhdocsllAHIAHdatalPlanninglPlanning Cases\2007\07-025 RV Regulations Zoning Amendment (PC Tabled)\120507 - PC Work Session - RV Ordinance.doc Page 1 oB "Watercraft". Specifically, all watercraft were removed from the definition of recreational vehicles and utility trailers so that the definitions would more accurately reflect the commonly understood use of these terms. Watercraft vehicles continue to be regulated under this ordinance, but are now listed separately from other types of RVs. For the purposes of this ordinance the term "RV" is used to reference those vehicles defined as recreational vehicles, as well as any utility trailers. The term "Watercraft" has replaced the term "Water-Oriented RV" and the definition now reads: Watercraft. Water-oriented vehicles and their trailers including, but not limited to, power boats, cruisers, jet skies, fishing/hunting boats, pontoon boats, as well as, row boats, sail boats, and other non-motorized craft with greater than two person capacity. This definition excludes non-motorized one and two person crafts such as canoes, kayaks, and paddle boats. In addition to boatlifts, non-motorized one and two person watercraft have been excluded from this definition entirely. These items will be dealt with in the Shoreline Management Code. Number of Permitted RVs and Watercraft Based on the discussion at the November 7th work session, the number of permitted RVs and watercraft has been set at three; however, of these, only one may be a motor home or other such vehicle. On shoreline properties, the number of additionally permitted watercraft has been reduced to two. This number was reduced because the definition of watercraft no longer includes canoes, kayaks, and paddle boats. Based on this ordinance, the owner of a shoreline lot would be permitted to have up to five RVs, trailers, and watercraft. Only one of the RVs could be a motor home or other such vehicle. Height/Length The maximum height of any RV or watercraft has been set at twelve feet. This is the minimum height that can be regulated without functionally prohibiting motor homes and travel trailers within the City. In addition to the 28 foot maximum length, a regulation has been added that would permit one motor home to be kept on property that is between the length of 28 and 34 feet, if certain requirements are met. The new language reads as follows: A. One (1) self-propelled motor home, travel trailer, camper, or other similar type of RV that is greater than twenty-eight (28) feet, but not larger than thirty-four City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Work Session for December 5, 2007 \\Ahdocsl\AHIAHdatalPlanninglPlanning Cases\2007\07-025 RV Regulations Zoning Amendment (PC Tabled)\120507 - PC Work Session - RV Ordinance. doc Page 2 on (34) feet, in length is permitted in the rear yard of a property provided that all of the following criteria are met: 1 . The RV meets all setback regulations 2. The rear yard is fully enclosed by a privacy fence 3. The RV is parked on an improved surface Staff feels that under these circumstances a 34 foot RV would be reasonably screened and the negative impacts on surrounding property owners and the community mitigated. Short-Term Utility Connections The ordinance has been changed to allow, with a permit renewable once during a twelve month period, a motor home or other similar vehicle to be used for temporary living purposes and be connected to water and electrical utilities for a period not to exceed seven days. The vehicle would also be required to be parked in the driveway of the property it is being stored on, at least five feet from any property line, and fifteen feet from the curb. The language of the code would require a City issued permit in order to connect the RV to water and/or electrical utilities and to use the RV for sleeping purposes for any amount oftime up to seven days. Administrative Permit Criteria The administrative permit process has been added to the proposed ordinance. The regulation reads as follows: B. Alternative locations for storing an RV or watercraft on a property will be permitted by the Zoning Administrator with an administrative permit for up to one (1) RV or watercraft, when topographic conditions or lot configuration do not allow for the normal location regulations to be met and all of the following criteria are met: 1. Depending on lot configuration, the Zoning Administrator will determine where on the lot is most appropriate for RV or watercraft storage. 2. The RV or watercraft is at least three feet from the side or rear property line; 3. The RV or watercraft shall not be stored forward of the principal structure This process will allow property owners to be issued a permit to store their R V s and watercraft in alternative locations under specific circumstances. Property owners would not be able to store an R V or watercraft in the front driveway. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Work Session for December 5,2007 \lAhdocsllAHlAHdatalPlanninglPlanning Cases\2007\07-025 RV Regulations Zoning Amendment (PC Tabled)\120507 - PC Work Session - RV Ordinance.doc Page 3 on Attachment 1 Proposed Recreational Vehicles, Utility Trailers, and Watercraft Outdoor Storage Ordinance - December 5, 2007 ~ ~HILLS December 5, 2007, Planning Commission Work Session December 5, 2007 Proposed Recreational Vehicle, Utility Trailer and, Watercraft Outdoor Storage Ordinance Definitions: Subd. 136 Recreational Vehicles and Utility Trailers. Vehicles or trailers for recreational or utilitarian uses that can be driven, towed, Dr hauled. This includes, bvt is nDt limited to, those vehicles commonly referred to as RVs, such as motor homes and tI:!'[vel'trailers, as well as any snowmobile, pull camper, all terrain vehicle (A TV), tent trailer,,'~I1ecial purpose trailer, utility trailer used for hauling, or other similar vehicle. A recreationilJe've'''''' e(s) such as an ATV on a trailer shall constitute one recreational vehicle. For the 'Rilrpose ,this code recreational vehicles and trailers are collectively referred to as "R V s" " ,.,d,. Watercraft. Water-oriented vehicles and their traiJ~s including, but not limife~ct<.l;power boats, cruisers, jet skies, fishinglhunting boats, pontoDn'b8~~s, as well as, row boats;c!~ail boats, and other non-motorized craft with greater than two persoI1i;t~'pacity.This definitiDrtexcludes non- motorized one and two person crafts such as canoes, kayaks; arid paddle boats. Height, RV and Watercraft. The hei ground to the highest point of the structur provided they are accessory and take up no \jc, an RV Dr watetcl'aft shall be measured from the j~g antennas alJ,putility/mechanical systems ~~,CI 0) perCl':Iit of the roof surface area. Length, RV and Watercraft. 'the length of ~q,J~.V or watgt&~ft shall be measured from end to end including any hitch,or motor, <Jior the purpd'1;es of measuring length, an RV or watercraft on a trailer will be measured as one vehicle. " 1325.10 Recreational Vehicle, Utility Trailer and, Watercraft Outdoor Storage. The unregulated outside parking and outside storage of recreational vehicles, utility trailers, and watercraft within a residential use district or accessory to a residential use is found to create a nuisance, hazard and detrimental influence upon the public health, safety and general welfare of the community by obstructing the view on streets and on private property, bringing noise and odors into residential areas, creating cluttered and otherwise unsightly areas, preventing the full use of residential streets for residential parking, reducing the useable open space of streets and private property and otherwise adversely affecting residential property v lues and neighborhood maintenance and improvement. Subd.1 General Regulations for RV's and Watercraft iri5~1I Dis U::,'< -'::::";, ....H ....., _._,,_.._' A. Storage in an Enclosed Structure. RVs andGW~t~icraft of any h~fgIit,pr length may be kept within an enclosed structure provi4~~the structure conform;N~~:,;the underlying -_::::,:<,''> --~Tj::"" zoning requirements of the district. ,",' "'"G:', :"'" ,G;,;" -.';:(-:::-.,::"': ;:-:': B. Attachment to Ground Not Permitted. RVs~hl.ljWatercraft shall not be permanently affixed to the ground in a m~Er that would prevent removal. RVs and Watercraft not permitted to be operated ori;'ij!1,~,'c streets shall be placed on or in a trailer or motor vehicle. " --- -- C. Use of RVs and Watercraft. No5~V8rwa ~i"i:f&~ttshall be used for temporary or permanent living,sl;:eping or housekt,eping purpo;ses in the City. RVs and watercraft shall not be connected to sewer, watef:, or other utility for any period of time, unless otherwiseperinitted in SlIbd. 3B ofthis'o~dil1,ance. D. Conditio~WhileStored.Aill~'?~'fl1ld,J~tercraft shall be stored or parked in a secure, s~fe;ordyrly, and wwbmaintained'eondition that does not inhibit emergency vehicle access toan,yjproperty. All RVs and watercraft shall be currently licensed and operable at all times whileGbeing stored. E. Ownership. Permitted storage shall only be allowed for RVs and watercraft owned by the o\\'ller or occupant of the property on which the RV and watercraft are stored. F. No RV 6fw.atercraft shall be permitted on a vacant lot without a primary structure unless in conformance with Section 1325.11. Subd.2 Permitted RV and Watercraft Storage. Storing RVs and watercraft outside of an enclosed building or structure is permitted in all residential districts provided that all of the following provisions are met: A. No more than three (3) RV's or watercraft may be stored outside on a residential lot. No more than one (I) of the three (3) RV's may be a self-propelled motor home, travel trailer, camper, or other similar type ofRV. 2 B. R V s and watercraft stored outside shall not be more than twenty-eight (28) feet in length or twelve (12) feet in height. C. One (1) self-propelled motor home, travel trailer, camper, or other similar type ofRV that is greater than twenty-eight (28) feet, but not larger than thirty-four (34) feet, in length is permitted in the rear yard of a property provided that all of the following criteria are met: 1. The RV meets all setback regulations in this Sl"ction; 2. The rear yard is fully enclosed by a privacxfehte; and 3. The RV is parked on an improved surfag~.c ....d.... .......m ..... ............ .m" ._ ." D. RVs and watercraft shall not be placed within the~fJ'ncipaF.sihlc:ture side yard setback and shall be at least ten (10) feet from any rt;~iipr6perty lin~s.'Ifboth side and rear yards are available for parking or storage,'eh'flIe location wiilithe least visibility from streets and neighboring property, termi1)ed by the ZonihgAdministrator, shall be used for such storage. "oser to the front property line than , in the case of corner lots the the principle structure or E. On any lot, RVs and watercraft shall not be sto the principle structure or attaclled garage. Additi RV shall not be stored close~.Jo!be property Ii attached garage in the side yard a;djaCei1.ttf?the street. "..d_ 'C',' ,-",,',..-.- .. F. Any RV or watercraft that is storedoutdo6is~ii~:1)~tb~ placed closer to the principle building of an 3gj<iit~i1)g lot than to tlIe/pnnciple bti:1.1ding on the lot where it is stored. __d' 'u.____ G. RVs andW'at~Fraft stCll'ed in the side Yllrd and visible from the public right-of-way shall be screene!icwith a privacy fence orJartdscaping of similar opacity as determined by the Zoning Adrn.il)istl'ato~,unll"ssthl"yare kept on an improved hard surface. ._ " .U" 'N',"_, "".'____' ....v ,........... .....,........." ....,_....-.. -,....,... ....,.....,.., H. A1ternativelQ8ationsfdl'f~toring an RV or watercraft on a property will be permitted by the Zoning~(jministfilt(jtWith an administrative permit for up to one (1) RV or watercraft, whellJ(jpographic conditions or lot configuration do not allow for the normal location regglations to be met and all of the following criteria are met: I. Depending on lot configuration, the Zoning Administrator Will determine where on the lot is most appropriate for RV or watercraft storage. 2. The RV or watercraft is at least three feet from the side or rear property line; 3. The RV or watercraft shall not be stored forward of the principal structure 3 Graphic Storage Location Summary. No part of the RV shall be outside of the permitted RV storage area described in the above section and displayed in the below graphics. . Principle Structure Side Yard Setback R-1 10 feet R-2 5 feet R-3 5 feet Front Yard 40' Property Line >,Curb~ Street 1~I~llim!!t;!t Permnled RV Parking Ii Subd.3 Short-Term RVall(}{.Watercraft p~~kiug in Re A. Short-Term Parking without Permit.."fLi~ensed and operable RVs and watercraft of any length orheipht mat be parked in~veways for the sole expressed purpose of loadin~,unloading'l)ll<ldt;lj,nil}~for a period not to exceed seventy-two (72) hours, I?WVidedth~ttheya'f~Il()t wiihihfifteen (15) feet of the curb, and are not within five "5) feet of aside.,propertyljne. ~hort-Term Pa)-~g with'Permit. Administrative Permits for a period of up to sev~Il(7) days, rel.\e.wable once during a twelve (12) month period, may be obtained fromqity Hall that would permit a licensed and operable RV or watercraft to park in the drive.'Nay, pro\tided it is not within fifteen (15) feet of the curb, and is not within five (5) feet.o.faside property line. This permit would allow a motor home or other similar vehicle to be connected to water and electricity. Subd. 4 Shoreline Residential Lots. A. In addition to the other permitted RV and watercraft storage in Section 1325.10 Subd 2, the owner or occupant of any shoreline lot is permitted to store two (2) additional watercraft. 4 B. RVs shall not be permitted within fifty (50) feet of the Ordinary High Water (OHW) mark on any property. C. Watercraft shall not be permitted within ten (10) feet of the OHW mark on any property and shall meet the principal structure side setback. If topographical conditions prohibit storing the watercraft at least ten (10) feet from the OHW mark, the Zoning Administrator may grant an administrative permit to allow watercraft storage closer than ten (10) from the OHW mark. R-3 5 feet utside of the permitted RV 0Waphics. Graphic Storage Location Summary. No part of the RV shall storage area described in the above section and displayed in th .. Principle Structure Side Yard Setback R-1 10 feet R-2 5 feet Front Yard 40' Property Line Curb~ Street Permitted RV Parking Permitted Water-Oriented RV Parking 5 Attachment 2 RV Codes from Surrounding Communities ~ ~HILLS December 5, 2007, Planning Commission Work Session RV Codes from Surrounding Communities City Shoreview New Brighton Roseville Mounds View Ordinance (B) Parking or Storage of Recreation Vehicles, Boats, ATV's, Snowmobiles, etc. (1) Recreational vehicles, boats, A TV's, snowmobiles, special purpose trailers or other vehicles designed or used for off-road purposes may be parked or stored in a garage or lawfully erected building, or may be parked or stored outdoors as follows: (a) No more than two such vehicles, not more than one of which is a recreational vehicle, shall be parked or stored outdoors on each lot. For the purposes hereof, a vehicle on a trailer shall be considered one vehicle. (b) Any such vehicle parked or stored outdoors shall be owned or leased by the occupant of the premises where parked or stored (c) Any such vehicle shall not be parked or stored within five feet of a side yard lot line, or within ten feet of a rear yard property line. Vehicles may be parked within the required front setback provided vehicles are parked on an approved asphalt, concrete or similar approved hard surface e. Outside storage of boats, campers, trailers, and other recreational vehicles shall be prohibited. [Multi-Family housing] Recreational vehicles must be parked on a paved surface and setback at least 5 feet from the property line. The amount of impervious surface devoted to Recreational Vehicles cannot exceed 300 feet. B. No person may place, park, store, or allow the placement or storage of Ice fish houses, skateboard ramps, play houses, or other similar nonpermanent structures outside continuously for longer than twenty four (24) hours in the front-yard area of residentially- zoned property. Storing of boats, trailers and inoperative motor vehicles in front yards is prohibited. (407.02M1) D. No person shall cause, undertake, permit or allow the outside parking and storage of vehicles in residentially zoned property for more than fourteen (14) thirty (30) days unless it complies with the following requirements. (407.02M3) 1. Vehicles which are parked or stored outside shall be on an improved surface as defined in this Code. 2. All vehicles, watercraft and other articles stored outside on residential property must be owned or leased by a person who is a legal resident of that property. 3. No person, owning, driving or in charge of any vehicle with a manufacturers rated capacity of more than one ton, as specified in Minnesota Statutes, may cause or permit that vehicle to be parked outside or stand continuous for more than two (2) hours on property or public street within a residential zone in the City. Q. Storing of Boats, Trailers and Inoperative Motor Vehicles In Front Yards [is considered a public nuisance]: 1. The storing of the following things for a period longer than 72 hours in the front yard of any residential zoned area [is prohibited]: a. Trailers of any kind, unless supporting a boat of 20 feet or less. b. Boats or watercraft of any kind in excess of 20 feet. c. Inoperative motor vehicles of any type. d. Campers and camper buses. 2. For the purpose of this Section, "front yard" means any area between any public street and a line parallel to the public street at the building line. (Ord. 522, 1-9-1967; 1995 Code) Subd. 4. Recreational Vehicles and Equipment: No person shall allow any recreational vehicle or equipment to be parked off-street closer than fifteen feet (15') to the paved surfaces of a public roadway. Recreational Vehicles shall be parked on a hard surface. Attachment 3 Public Comments ~ ~HiLLS December 5, 2007, Planning Commission Work Session 10/4/2007 Meagan, I was the individual who spoke up having a concern about the diagram and description on Subdivision 4 of the ordinance. I live at 3473 Lake Johanna and like Roberta Thompson live on Lake Johanna with a access to my property on a 100 foot easement off of Indian Place (a cul-de- sac). The public would view the side of my neighbors house as they drove to my house. I am not sure if this would be consider "in public view". We also have neighbors who access their properties thru alleys or other easements. I am not sure if this is only on Lake Johanna because of the way the property was developed. I share the same neighbor as the individual who spoke about the upkeep of his neighbor on Indian Place. Dave Scherbel was out this morning to talk to that neighbor as he has been guilty of several code violations. My concern would be the enforcement of the code as it is now presented without considering the uniqueness of an easement or alley access to their property. Sorry to hear that we are losing Karen. Chuck Mertensotto 3473 Lake Johanna Blvd. Meagan - Thank you for taking the time to talk to me about the proposed regnlation. I think it is good that you are attempting to define what is an RV. I like the definition you are using with the exception of boat lifts. Boatlifts are not an RV and should not be included. I would also add to the definition at the end the third sentence the words "other types of trailers or other similar vehicles" so it is clear all types of trailers are included in the definition including boat trailers. Are you going to require all trailers to be registered as well as true motorized recreational vehicles? First, I do not believe that true Recreational Travel Vehicles should be stored on any residential city lot under 1/2 acre in size. In my opinion, they are unsightly and detract from the appearance of neighborhoods. The requirement that boat lifts be stored more than 10 feet from the high water mark does not make any sense to me especially in those areas where there are terrain issues. What does the 10 feet setback do for the city? What are those residents on the west side of Lake Johanna Blvd going to store their water front equipment? Hauling the lifts up another 10 feet just damages what vegetation and landscaping you have on your lake side. I personally think you should require all boat lifts stored to have their canvas or cloth covered material removed so they do not block the neighbors view. If you are going to permit the storage of an RV vehicles, it should be limited to a maximum of one such true RV motorized vehicle or travel trailer and possibly one other vehicle. If someone can afford multiple RVs they can obviously afford storage for these vehicles so neighbors do not have to look at them. I have seen some homes with several boats, trailers, camper tops for pickup trucks and a recreational vehicle all situated in the back yard of the property. On lake side properties, I would not permit any non watercraft RVs on the lake side except for boat lifts and water accessories (Le. docks and rafts). Thank you for your considerations. Stephen L. Nelson Direct Dia1642-2606 Paul N, Trites, M.D. 1850 Indian Place Arden Hills, Minnesota 55112 Memo To: Honorable Members of Arden Hills Planning Commission and Honorable Members of Arden Hills City Council Date: November 7,2007 RE: Recreational Vehicle Policy Dear Members: I am a resident of Arden Hills near the Lake Johanna Schmidt Lake Park area. I have been a residentover the past 29 years since 1978. I have enjoyed bringing up my family here and plan to be a lifetime resident over the next many years. One of the reasons for my purchasing property in the Arden Hills area was the open feel and the type of people that resided in the area. Most of the people that live in Arden Hills are hard working people that like to make use of the outdoors and many sports activities. Many residents make use of recreational time with the use of recreational vehicles in the form RV, trailers, and other vehicles that help them enjoy the outdoors in Minnesota. Many of the residents live in Arden Hills specifically so that they have the space around them that allows the use of Recreational Vehicles on their property. It is necessary in most cases to have the recreational vehicles on the property so that they can be used and prepared for use when they are taken out for use. To restrict or impinge on the type and usage ofthe type ofRV that can be stored on the property over and above what is currently done is an undue hardship on those that have been using their RV on their property over the past 50 plus years. This affects the reason that they purchased their property, purchased their RV, and paid taxes to support Arden Hills over these many years. To change the character of the city to restrict RV on property is the wrong way to approach this problem. If there is a problem with certain situations in the city, these can usually be handled on an individual basis depending on the needs of neighbors, topographical problems, or other special needs. In looking over the problems and issues that have been summarized in the proposed changes to date the way in which to handle these issues are Page 2. Letter from Paul N. Trites, M.D. RE: RVordinance. The present requirements with the allowance of Three RV on the property have been a workable model for many years. This has allowed the use ofRV's by the residents with minimal problems. Additional means to help with the RV on property is proper screening with fencing, vegetation, or other appropriate screening methods. A clarification of the ordinance is necessary. There are a number of errors that are impractical. One of these is the height restriction. Most Motorized R V's are in the 11 to 13 foot height level. There are very few RV in the Seven foot and under category. The length of the R V should be extended to 34 feet with the restriction that it needs to be screened or covered properly and on the proper surface. Most RV's that are available today are over 28 feet. I feel with the proper communication and courtesy with neighbors that the present RV ordinance can be improved upon without further restricting the use of these vehicles by citizens of Arden Hills. I appreciate the opportunity to present this material. If there are any questions please contact me at 320-333-0896 or by email atpaultrites(W.yahoo.com Sincerely Paul N. Trites, M.D. 11/8/2007 Meagan - I was at the meeting but I had to leave after 8:30 p.m. when they were still going strong on the corner of County Rd. E and Lexington. I wanted to speak but I had to be somewhere by 9:30 p.m. Did boat lifts get excluded from the definition? I personally would suggest changing the definition of RV as it relates to watercraft. You refer to Water related recreation vehicles in one separate paragraph and in the definition of RVs you refer to just "watercraft." I would want to tidy up the wording so you have consistency. Has the city attorney looked at the wording? Why use two different terms for watercraft? Please let me know what ended up happening. Thank you. Steve Nelson 11/15/2007 Hello James. I spoke at the last planning meeting and stated that I was having a problem printing your PDF's files. Since your Adobe Reader was 3.x and mine was 8.x I thought that this might be the problem. Problem turned out to be the default document preferences were set be Adobe to be non default values. When I changed them to default, I could print ok. My second question. If someone asks for a variance for a motor home (RV) do the neighbors get notified? My third comment. You seem to be having a lot of problems getting the wording of the RV document right to fit all situations. Why not 2 sections, one for RV only, and the other for all other wheeled trailers, etc. thanks Steve Gericke 651-633-8792 ~ ~HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: December 5, 2007 PC Agenda Item 3.D TO: Planning Commission Meagan Beekman, Planner I ~ FROM: SUBJECT: Planning Case #07-030 Zoning Code Amendment: Permitted Encroachments City of Arden Hills 1245 West Highway 96 Requested Action Consider approving a Zoning Code text amendment related to permitted setback encroachments. Backl!round In November 2006, the City re-codified the Zoning Code, which included a number minor and legally required updates. However, the Zoning Code is an evolving document that needs to be reviewed, updated, and clarified to ensure the spirit, intent, and goals of the Code are being met. As time allows, Staff will be proposing updates and changes to the Zoning Code to make it clearer and more effective. Permitted Encroachments Presently, Section 1325.03 of the Zoning Code permits certain architectural aspects of buildings to encroach into the required structure setbacks (.e.g. roof overhangs, entry steps, and bay windows). Section 1325.03 Subd. 2A of the Zoning Code currently reads: Subd.2 Permitted Encroachments. A. Parts of the Principal Structure. Features which are part of a principal structure, including but not limited to eaves, cantilevered areas, cornices, canopies, awnings, balconies, fire escapes and chimneys, may extend three City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for December 5, 2007 llAhdocsJIAH\AHdatalPlanninglPlanning Cases\2007\07-030 Permitted Encroachments Zoning Amendment (PENDING)\] 20507 - PC Reporl- Permitted Encroachments.doc Page 1 of3 (3) feet into the required front, side, and rear setbacks but in no case shall these encroachments be less than six (6) feet from any lot line. Decks, uncovered porches, ramps, and steps may extend six (6) feet into the required front, side, and rear setbacks but in no case shall these encroachments be less than six (6) feet from any lot line. Required steps per the International Codes shall be permitted encroachments. Permitted Encroachments Amendment While the language of the permitted encroachments regulation is clear, the requirement that "in no case shall these encroachments be less than six (6) feet from any lot line" is inconsistent with the building code and thus has affected how this ordinance has been applied in the past, particularly in the R-2 and R-2 zones. The building code requires that all encroachments be set back a minimum ofthree feet from any lot line, while the Zoning Code requires six feet. In and of itself, the incompatibility between the zoning code and building code is not a significant concern since zoning codes can be more stringent than building codes. However, the six foot minimum setback from the property line is directly incompatible with current structure setback requirements in R-2 and R-3 zoning districts, which require that primary structures have a side yard setback of at least five feet on one side. Based on current code, a property owner in an R-2 zoning district could build a house five feet from the side property line but could technically not have a roof overhang or required steps into the home be within six feet from that property line. After reviewing the current zoning code and building code and consulting with the City Building Official, Staff is proposing the following revised "Permitted Encroachments" ordinance: 1325.03 Subd.2 Permitted Encroachments. A. Parts of the Principal Structure. \. In all zoning districts except R-2 and R-3, features which are part of a principal structure, including but not limited to eaves, cantilevered areas, cornices, canopies, awnings, balconies, fire escapes and chimneys, may extend three (3) feet into the required front, side, and rear setbacks but in no case shall these encroachments be less than six (6) feet from any lot line. Decks, uncovered porches, ramps, and steps may extend six (6) feet into the required front, side, and rear setbacks but in no case shall these encroachments be less than six (6) feet from any lot line. 2. In the R-2 and R-3 zoning districts, the permitted encroachments listed in the above part 1 may extend three (3) feet into the requirement front, side, and rear setbacks but in no case shall these encroachments be less than three (3) feet from any lot line. 3. Required steps per the International Codes shall be permitted encroachments in all districts. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meetingfor December 5, 2007 llAhdocsJIAlf1.AHdatalPlanninglPlanning Cases12007\07-030 Permitted Encroachments Zoning Amendment (PENDING)\J 20507 - PC Report- Permitted Encroachments.doc Page 2 of3 The proposed amendment clarifies the intent of the code, is in conformance with how the code was applied in the past, and eliminates the incompatibility of the current primary structure setback requirements in the R-2 and R-3 zones. The ordinance could be changed to reduce the permitted encroachments in all districts to a minimum of three feet from any property line, but Staff feels that while the building code permits such a setback, requiring a minimum of six feet is reasonable, except in the R-2 and R-3 districts where a side yard setback of five feet is permitted. Options 1. Recommend Approval as Proposed: Motion to recommend avvroval of Planning Case 07- 030 to amend the Permitted Encroachments Ordinance in Section 1325.03 Subd. 2A of the Zoning Code as presented in the December 5, 2007, planning case report. 2. Recommend Approval with Changes: Motion to recommend avvroval of Planning Case 07- 030 to amend the Permitted Encroachments Ordinance in Section 1325.03 Subd. 2A of the Zoriing Code with the following changes... 3. Recommend Denial: Motion to recommend denial of Planning Case 07-030 to amend the Permitted Encroachments Ordinance in Section 1325.03 Subd. 2A ofthe Zoning Code as presented in the October 3, 2007, planning case report. 4. Table: Motion to table Planning Case 07-030 to amend the Permitted Encroachments Ordinance in Section 1325.03 Subd. 2A of the Zoning Code: a specific reason and/or information request should be included with a motion to table. A change to the Zoning Code requires a public hearing before the Planning Commission and approval from 4/5 of the City Council. The Zoning Code change would go into effect upon publication in the official City newspaper. Notice Notice was published in the Shoreview-Arden Hills Bulletin. Staff has not received any letters, e-mails, or telephone calls from property owners or occupants in regard to this planning case. Resident Comment The City has not received any comments regarding this application. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meetingfor December 5, 2007 \lAhdocsJIAHtAHdata\PlanninglPlanning Cases\2007\07-030 Permitted Encroachments Zoning Amendment (PENDING)\l20507 ~ PC Report- Permitted Encroachments.doc Page 3 of3 ~ /],\~HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: December 5, 2007 PC Agenda Item 4.B TO: Planning Commission / /- James Lehnhoff, City Plann~ Planning Commission Terms and Term Limits FROM: SUBJECT: Requested Action No action is required at this time. Backl!round Earlier this year, the City Council revised the portion of the City Code that deals with appointing people to the various commissions and committees. The previous code set a one-year term for Planning Commission members, and each year the entire Commission needed to be reappointed by the City Council. In an effort to retain institutional knowledge amongst the commission and committees but to still encourage the addition of new people over time, the Council adopted longer terms for all committee and commission members but also set term limits. The revised code now sets three-year terms for commission and committee members as opposed to the previous one-year term. However, each member is now limited to no more than three consecutive three-year terms. The revised code also requires the terms to be staggered so that not everyone is up for reappointment in the same year. Therefore, starting in 2008, three members will be in year one of their first term, three members will be in year two, and two members will be in year three. A standard methodology of how each commission and committee member is assigned to a year in their first term is currently be developed and will be ready for the first meeting in 2008. All members will be considered to be in their first term. As part of the revised Code, an alternate Planning Commissioner has been added that can fill in when one of the regular members is unable to attend the meeting. The alternate member is a new position that will be appointed by the City Council. This memo is for your information and no action is required at this time. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meetingfor December 5, 2007 \\Metro-inet.uslardenhills\PlanninglPlanning CommissionWew-Old Business\20071120507 - PC Term limits.doc Page 1 of! ~ ~HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: December 05, 2007 PC Agenda Item 5.A TO: Planning Commission Meagan Beekman, Planner 1 ~ FROM: SUBJECT: City Council Planning Case Update The City Council did not review any planning cases at their November 13, 2007 meeting. The City Council reviewed the following planning cases at their November 26, 2007 meeting. Planninl! Case 07-018 for a Master Planned Unit Development.. Final PUD for Phase 1, Preliminary Plat, and Final Plat - Arden Plaza Redevelopment This planning case was withdrawn by the applicant. Ordinance 390 - A Moratorium in the B-2 General Business District The City Council unanimously approved a moratorium on the construction of new and the expansion of existing structures in the B-2 General Business District for the period of one year. During that time the City will develop a small area plan for that district. Planninl! Case 07-024 for a Conditional Use Permit Amendment at 1230 Red Fox Road The City Council unanimously approved a CUP Amendment for Sprint to reconfigure cell antennas on the City water tower, contingent on a signed lease agreement amendment between the City and Sprint. Amendment No.1 to the Februarv 29. 2000. PCS Site Al!reement between the Sprint Spectrum L.P. and the City of Arden Hills The proposed lease agreement amendment raised that annual rent for the leased space on the water tower to $18,000 per year. The City Council unanimously approved an amended lease agreement that requires Sprint to pay the City $22,200 a year to attach their antennas to the water tower. Sprint has not yet signed the amended lease agreement. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meetingfor December 05, 2007 \\Ahdocsl \AH\AHdata\Planning\Planning Commission\CC Reports\120507 - PC report - CC report.doc Page 1 of 1