Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-01-08-PCChair Clayton Larson Commissioners ,--AEN HILLS 1245 W. Highway 96 Arden Hills, MN 55112 Andrew Holewa Liz Modesette 651.792.7800 Daniel Reiff Arden Hills www.ci.arden-hills.mn.us Janet Stodola Roberta Thompson Planning Commission Clayton Zimmerman October 1, 2008 City Vision A strong community that values our unique environment, our fiscal soundness, and our tradition as a desirable city in which to live, work, and play. Agenda Regular Planning Commission Convenes 6:30 PM Call to Order 1. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA 2. MINUTES A. August 6, 2008 Regular Meeting 3. PLANNING CASES A. Planning Case 08-024; Preliminary Plat of Christensen Estates; Richard J. Christensen —Public Hearing B. Planning Case 08-025; PUD Amendment and Site Plan Review; Boston Scientific; 4100 Hamline Avenue — Public Hearing C. Planning Case 08-026; CUP Amendment; Arby's Restaurant Group; 3751 Lexington Avenue —Public Hearing D. Planning Case 08-027; DRAFT Master Plan for the New Lake Johanna Boulevard —Public Hearing 4. UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS 5. REPORTS 17-1 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/planningcases Itla-_ --ARZEN HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: October 1, 2008 PC Agenda Item 3.A TO: Planning Commission FROM: Meagan Beekman, City Planner SUBJECT: Planning Case #: 08-024 Preliminary and Final Plat of Christensen Estates Richard J. Christensen PID: 34-30-23-31-0012 ATTACHMENTS: A — Application and Supporting Materials B — City Engineer Memo Dated January 24, 2008 C — Air Photo and Photographs D — Plat Maps and Supplementary Plans Requested Action The applicant is requesting approval of a Preliminary and Final Plat to subdivide one property into four conforming lots in the plat of Christensen Estates. Background 1. Overview of Request The applicant submitted an application for a Preliminary and Final Plat of this property in January of this year. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval at their February 6, 2008, meeting, and the City Council approved the Plat at their meeting on February 25, 2008. The Zoning Code requires the applicant to file the final plat with Ramsey County, sign all necessary agreements, and pay the park dedication fee within 60 days of Council approval. The plat was not filed by the April 26, 2008, deadline and the preliminary and final plat expired. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 1, 2008 IlMetro-inet.uslardenhillslPlanninglPlanning Cases 12008108-024 Christensen Estates Preliminary and Final Plat (Pending) 1100108- PC Report - Christensen Estates Plat.doc Page 1 of 10 Therefore, the applicant has resubmitted the Preliminary and Final Plat for Christensen Estates. The overall proposal to subdivide the 3.08 acre property into four new conforming lots has remained entirely unchanged. The property is vacant and does not have an assigned address. The property is located to the east of Snelling Avenue/Highway 51 and to the west of the intersection of Hamline Avenue and Ingerson Road (Attachment C), which is near the northwest side of Lake Josephine. The property is not adjacent to Lake Josephine. The applicant has submitted a Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) approved wetland delineation report, existing conditions map, Preliminary Plat, and preliminary grading plan (Attachment D). The soil information submitted previously has not changed since the application was last reviewed. The Rice Creek Watershed District has reviewed the proposal and issued a conditional approval upon receipt of changes (CAPROC). The changes requested by RCWD are minor and are not anticipated to change the layout of the proposed plat. The submitted plans do show potential locations for future dwellings; however, those are only meant to illustrate that there is room on each lot for a dwelling. The exact location of each dwelling will be determined as each lot is developed through the building permit process. No variances are anticipated for any of the lots as they are developed. This plat is being processed as a preliminary and final plat review simultaneously. There are conditions that need to be met prior to executing the final plat, and the park dedication fee will need to be paid. 2. Site Data Park Vacant R-1: Single Family Residential 3.9 acres The topographyis enerall flat with a lar a expanse of wetlands. While the future land use map does list the property as "park," that designation does not impact the development of this property since the underlying zoning is residential. To turn the property into a public park or to prohibit development, the property would need to be purchased by the City or other public entity. The area of the four properties on the plat do not add up to 3.9 acres because a 33 foot wide strip of land will be dedicated to the City as part of the Hamline Avenue right-of-way on the final plat. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 1, 2008 IlMetro-inet.uslardenhillslPlanninglPlanning Cases 12008108-024 Christensen Estates Preliminary and Final Plat (Pending) 1100108 - PCReport - Christensen Estates Plat. doc Page 2 of 10 3. Surrounding Area North -- -- Highway 51 /Snelling Avenue South Low Density Residential R-1: Single Family Residential Single Family Detached Residential East Low Density Residential R-1: Single Family Residential Hazelnut Park West -- -- Highway 51/Snelling Avenue Plan Evaluation 1. Zoning Code — Minimum Lot Requirements - Section 1320.06 :}}}:{•}'f.•}}Yrs?:•:'..+•:'{'}:r•YJ.v. r:...4, ..fi }?':J:'\•n\.. } {+{ •4,}i•.:..:'•{.:i::�:{:: :tii. d?:'}:•:{: '•:{•:{i: {vv.:• •; . •::: v • v.,}•;^\ '•}}}'i:•:: •. 8fn 3�f,.::. •: fvk �. :n%iv.};':::%'}}r};C}a \:.:, :� ?: •.v}....•'• . K.:..;4:...1:n . !ii:..;f.:•.$x+.v::#:::+r>�nti{•}}},4+•F,;: yv� v;.},. ...{..4 {fC.v.:.}�f.. .. +J.{{.. 44. ntiri ;{ 4�,:�\{: vvi{�>.•:: .:M1•!t:?.4v\ •.4: \: :}.{i}+{::ff'•i+f,.�i:% �:?;;:•}r}!:•:!�7:iii'lr}. w:�•p.k:: ''`f�filr�'` `,•{Yh ti:+^ r. �..{::::3F.•v.{}:titi'� 4{''`'� •a. 4 :}.i;'f�:4...5'•{kr:•}}:�'•k�+�.:4}^.':iY�. ti•: Y i'{:}}}nf :. 'ry} \ 4. ki4•{{::�%::. •v}%.}:. Y.: �:itix•. vtii%:`• i:•:o'!.{{'+Q`+.v;}+f:};,fin}.;:./:{::::;:::,+.:.'•}: N }. . :• ': {'' '}:�:: .. n4\ .. i:s;}%�{h 'V 4.4.•.`~\•:4'.h v6ti :•}:�:v. v; } {ir} r}%:: }+}v::}:;:i �i+i'{•.ti:.:%r?.: r .'v..., .. Lo �:: ..:� �� .�� •} \ 4 •}...�1•':}. : }'•':ti4}\ 4 : �•\�: • }{. ••v •: v::::: n;f;+..:::::••::: nrry:,f.::::: }::::: .; ...v .. .::::.v: .vn 4, ��, :::♦ �4 :......n..n....u.•r...........n::::.;•::.::}:v:{.}:{vv::::: •:?}:•}:•}:•}ii;•}' ^:•}}i}:G:{{w. a......::i•?:�•?:•:8:6:v.... , 4•.:, 4.44: a4\'�}hti,•' 1. Minimum Lot Area s SF per Dwelling Unit Single Family 14,000 3. Minimum Lot Size (ft, width/depth/corner lot width) Single Family 95/130/105 4. Height ft.) 35 5. Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R.) 0.3 6. Lot Covered by Structure 25% 7. Min. Landscape Lot Area 65% 8. Minimum Building Setbacks ft Front yard 40 Rear Yard (Principle) 30 Rear Yard(Accessory) 10 Side Yard Interior - Principal (Min/total both yards on lot) 10/25 Side Yard Interior - Accessory 10 Side Yard Corner 40 A. Proposed Lot Size, Width, and Depth Despite the increased right-of-way width for Snelling Avenue/Highway 51, the four proposed lots still meet or exceed the minimum lot area, width and depth. The wetlands comprise a large portion of Lot 1 and Lot 4 on the southern and northern ends of the property. Although the Zoning and Subdivision Code does not require a minimum buildable lot size, the total area outside of the easements is shown in the above chart. All of the wetlands would be inside of a drainage and City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 1, 2008 1IMetro-inet.uslardenhillslPlanninglPlanning Cases 12008108-024 Christensen Estates Preliminary and Final Plat (Pending) 1100108 - PC Report - Christensen Estates Plat. doc Page 3 of 10 utility easement. The applicant is not proposing to fill any of the wetlands. There appears to be sufficient land outside of the easements to construct adequately sized dwellings. No variances are needed for the proposed lot sizes or configurations. Christensen Estates Lot Total Lot Area Total Area Outside Easements Width Depth 1 23,999 41105 225 74-145 2 15,408 8,109 95 147-177 3 29,427 171212 144 177-226 4 56.347 16,257 500+ 175-226 Minimum 1 14,000 1 n/a 1 95 (105 corner) 130 B. Setbacks and Lot Coverage — Meets requirements All four proposed lots would be able to meet the minimum setbacks and would not exceed the maximum lot coverage. No variances should be needed for future development. 2. Subdivision Ordinance — A. Street Access and Utilities (Section 1130.03 & 1140.05) No new streets are needed for this development. All four lots will access Hamline Avenue, which is a City street in this part of Arden Hills. Water and sewer access is available on the eastern side of Hamline Avenue. As each lot is developed, the utilities will be connected. Utility connections and road repair will be at the expense of the property owner. B. Easements (Section 1130.05 and 1130.08) City subdivision regulations require twelve foot wide utility and drainage easements dedicated to the City along the right-of-way and centered on common lot lines. The plat includes a twenty foot easement that is centered on the shared lots lines and a twelve foot easement along the Hamline Avenue right-of-way. The easements along the shared property lines and along Hamline Avenue are sufficient. In order to "clean up" the plat, the applicant is proposing to vacate the easements that are currently located on the property and create new drainage and utility easements that include all of the wetland areas. The proposed easements City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 1, 2008 IlMetro-inet.uslardenhillslPlanninglPlanning Cases 12008108-024 Christensen Estates Preliminary and Final Plat (Pending) 1100108 - PCReport - Christensen Estates Plat.doc Page 4 of 10 would encompass all of the existing easements. The City Council would review the vacation requests prior to the execution of the Final Plat. The subdivision regulations require all ponding and drainage areas to be included in drainage easements that are dedicated to the City. All of the wetlands on the property will be incorporated into a drainage and utility easement. C. Grading. The applicant had submitted soil boring data and a preliminary grading plan as part of the original application. The grading plan (Attachment C) includes the estimated fill needed for each lot when it is developed. Lots 1 and 2 are estimated to need 250 cubic yards of fill, lot 3 is expected to need 200 cubic yards, and lot 4 is expected to need 420 cubic yards. The fill is primarily needed for soil correction and to bring the basement slab to the property elevation. Grading and filling would not occur until each lot is developed. The City and the RCWD would review individual grading and filling as part of the building permit process. The submitted soil analysis does state that the property has limited suitability for construction. The analysis includes guidelines for future construction on the site to mitigate the effects of the low soil suitability for development. The grading information is essentially unchanged from the first review of the Preliminary Plat. D. Trees and Tree Removal (Section 1140.05 Subd 4 and 1325.055) The applicant has submitted a preliminary tree removal plan indicating possible locations for future tree removal; however, since tree removal will not occur until the lots develop the final tree removal plan will be required to meet the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance. Lots 1 and 2 would require very little if any tree removal because the dry area is, for the most part, treeless. Lots 3 and 4 would require tree removal along the Hamline Avenue right-of-way and into the property for the driveway and dwelling. Depending on the number of significant trees on the site, it is possible that tree replacement will be required. A tree survey will be required prior to the issuance of any building permits. Trees could not be removed from the easements or wetland area without City or RCWD approval. Prior to receiving a building or grading permit, the property owner will be required to submit a tree survey and comply with any ordinances regarding tree preservation that are in place at the time of submittal. Approving this plat does not exempt future construction from a future tree preservation ordinance. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 1, 2008 IlMetro-inet.uslardenhillslPlanninglPlanning Cases 12008108-024 Christensen Estates Preliminary and Final Plat (Pending) 1100108 - PCReport - Christensen Estates Plat.doc Page 5 of 10 E. Park Dedication (1130.08 Subd 2) For a subdivision that results in three net new lots, Section 1130.08 Subd. 2 of the Subdivision Ordinance permits the City to require the applicants to dedicate up to seven percent of the buildable land area in the subdivision or to pay a park dedication fee of up to seven percent of the property's land value at the time the final plat is approved. Since the trail along Hamline Avenue already belongs to the City and the remaining land does not easily lend itself to park or other recreational uses, a park dedication fee would likely be more appropriate then a land dedication. An official appraisal of the property was submitted to the City that determined the current value of the entire property to be $250,000. State Statutes require the City to use the value of the property prior to execution of the final plat when determining park dedication fees. The maximum park dedication fee for the entire property would be $17,500 or $4,375 for each of the lots. However, the City can only charge the fee for three net new lots. Exempting one of the lots reduces the maximum park dedication fee to $13,125. While the City does have regulations for setting the maximum park dedication fee, State Statutes (462.358 Subd 2.b and 2.c) have additional criteria that while not directly reflected in the City's Subdivision Code, must be considered: ■ The regulations may require that a reasonable portion of the buildable land, as defined by municipal ordinance, of any proposed subdivision be dedicated to the public or preserved for public use as streets, roads, sewers, electric, gas, and water facilities, storm water drainage and holding areas or ponds and similar utilities and improvements, parks, recreational facilities, playgrounds, trails, wetlands, or open space ■ In establishing the portion to be dedicated or preserved or the cash fee, the City shall give due consideration to the open space, recreational, or common areas and facilities open to the public that the applicant proposes to reserve for the subdivision. ■ The municipality must reasonably determine that it will need to acquire that portion of land for the purposes stated in this subdivision as a result of approval of the subdivision. ■ The municipality must not deny the approval of a subdivision based solely on an inadequate supply of parks, open spaces, trails, or recreational facilities within the municipality. ■ There must be an essential nexus between the fees or dedication and the municipal purpose sought to be achieved by the fee or dedication. The fee or dedication must bear a rough proportionality to the need created by the proposed subdivision or development. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 1, 2008 IlMetro-inet.uslardenhillslPlanninglPlanning Cases 12008108-024 Christensen Estates Preliminary and Final Plat (Pending) 1100108 - PCReport - Christensen Estates Plat.doc Page 6 of 10 ■ If a municipality is given written notice of a dispute over a proposed fee in lieu of dedication before the municipality's final decision on an application, a municipality must not condition the approval of any proposed subdivision or development on an agreement to waive the right to challenge the validity of a fee in lieu of dedication. The italicized bullet points are particularly important because they point to the overall theme in State Statutes for setting the park dedication fee. Essentially, the park dedication fee must be reasonable and proportional to the impact of the subdivision on the park system. For example, it would be difficult to require one residential lot to be pay a fee of $20,000 while another lot pays a $5,000 fee when the impact is essentially the same. Most single-family residential lots will have a similar impact on the City's park and recreational system. Therefore, in order to be consistent with other recent park dedication fees, Staff reviewed the fees from plats going back to 2005. Planning Case New Lots Fee per Lot 05-019 3 $5,200 06-002 1 $4,808 06-004 1 $4,896 06-001 2 $3,797 06-038 2 $6,276 06-039 2 $6,276 07-005 1 $51250 07-014 16 NA f''}. v;...: •ii4.•'* ..:N:i i.:ii Y:.:ii}ii vx:{i;.r :.::.; %.... •:}:....k '• .'6k:'i; a: }:tiyi tlJ• • `\i•.':vS:vv.',:ti ti}v:. •iti•:b}ti •;•::4•}:;: ":�:'`•'t`%}:.,,y%,.,••M1:.. •:nk:•:.r r: $�':. C ..\,`.;. •w :b2:• ..o'c•., `S',: `,}'.t:`�CA :'.•..;\ • <:{• tiL L:.k itk.,yh.: v^ ' w,$ :i: 1C 4:•{,.}�4'YL'.;} :;� }� `>ti•:r : k 4 - +ih ?4}•'•` mii, :.�• 4 v: :;v{>+}.}, }:L�`�•�� is"+``t•:i:v:�:t'{} '�^{::': }}}ti'2Q;,�v)��;�•:•:'ki.`} .•:`} r:M1 ,k4 �•ti�.,•.L:'•'dt4\C:�: .:.:,'S, :i•::,+.3! �y J:;;\+.;, :.,L}v3},'}¢, '.$�n,'}k ,'!LJ•'::r:�'.. .'•��`•'•',•.•.'. y'•\l\\1 .frw 4.�:i :.�}}8}YC:ti::.::�'{..4,.''irir''•::%{•}};:�:5'}]c.::::,'•4:v .pkv 4 •: :.�:4�Aiti'::: i:,%.;. `'.' :•i:'�`�':,v....•.•\'Liv;; •.wvk. •''•: ~: •�~4}::�ry;••; :: i.}}.... {lv..:..... .....•... ti}!?}i(::r4r..�:\4\iv.:4: \: i'., .: • . v.. :•...�:::...:.. n.;., }.'\'•.vv}t:::..h •\�.::k:: •: Average $5,215 At $4,375 per lot, the park dedication fee for Christensen Estates is below the average park dedication fee required in other recently approved plats. However, to stay in conformance with City Code and State Statutes, the park dedication fee for Christensen Estates cannot be raised higher than $4,375 for each of the three net new lots. Staff is recommending a total park dedication fee for Christensen Estates subdivision of $13,125. This is the maximum fee, and it can be reduced by the City Council. F. Development Agreement (1140.04 Subd 2) Although there are no public improvements associated with this property, a development agreement will be prepared to address future grading, erosion control, wetland protection, the park dedication fee, and any other long-term City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 1, 2008 IlMetro-inet.uslardenhillslPlanninglPlanning Cases 12008108-024 Christensen Estates Preliminary and Final Plat (Pending) 1100108 - PCReport - Christensen Estates Plat.doc Page 7 of 10 conditions. The agreement will be subject to City Council approval and reviewed during the final plat stage of the process. 3. Rice Creek Watershed District. The Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) is charged with reviewing and approving the drainage plan. The plat proposal has been submitted to the RCWD, and they did issue a conditional approval upon receipt of changes (CAPROC). An approved permit from RCWD will be required prior to the City executing the final plat. The changes requested by the RCWD are not expected to impact the plat design. Based on initial comments from the RCWD review, the applicant has included infiltration basins between Lots 1 and 2 and between Lots 3 and 4. The infiltration basins are located within the drainage easements centered on the shared lot lines. 4. Additional Plan Review The City Engineer has reviewed the application and her comments do not impact the layout of the subdivision. Her comments have been incorporated into the recommended conditions of approval. Findings of Fact Zoning Code Findings: 1. The lot layouts in the preliminary and final plat proposal meet or exceed all of the requirements of the underlying R-1 Zone, including minimum lot size, lot width, and lot depth. 2. All four lots are capable of accommodating a detached single family dwelling that meets all required setbacks and coverage limits without any additional variances. 3. No zoning variances are anticipated when each of the lots are developed. Subdivision Ordinance Findings: 4. The proposed lot layouts meet or exceed all of the requirements of the City of Arden Hills Subdivision Code. 5. All four lots are adjacent to the Hamline Avenue right-of-way and capable of supporting separate driveways. 6. The drainage areas and stormwater pond areas are included in a drainage easement that will be dedicated to the City and/or Rice Creek Watershed District. 7. The park dedication fee applies to this subdivision and shall be set by the City Council. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 1, 2008 IlMetro-inet.uslardenhillslPlanninglPlanning Cases 12008108-024 Christensen Estates Preliminary and Final Plat (Pending) 1100108 - PCReport - Christensen Estates Plat.doc Page 8 of 10 8. The plat has been submitted to the Rice Creek Watershed District for review. 9. No subdivision variances are required for this application. Staff Recommendation Based on the findings of fact, the Preliminary Plat is in conformance with the Zoning and Subdivision regulations. Therefore, Staff is recommending approval of the Preliminary and Final Plat of Christensen Estates subject to the following ten conditions: 1. The road access locations to Hamline Avenue shall be subject to approval from the Public Works Director. 2. Final grading and erosion control plans for each lot shall be subject to approval by the City Engineer and the Rice Creek Watershed District prior to the issuance of building permits or grading. 3. The lots shall not be graded or cleared prior to the issuance of building or grading permits for a particular lot. 4. A tree survey and mitigation plans in accordance with the City's regulations regarding tree preservation shall be submitted prior to the issuance of any building or grading permits. 5. The utility plans for each lot shall be subject to approval by the City Engineer and Public Works Director prior to the issuance of any building permits. 6. The applicant shall obtain all necessary permits from the Rice Creek Watershed District, Ramsey County, the Metropolitan Council, the State of Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and any other governing agencies where applicable before the final plat is executed. 7. The applicant shall pay a park dedication fee of $13,125. The park dedication fee shall be paid in full prior to the execution of the Final Plat, or the property owner shall enter into an agreement for a payment plan that is in accordance with Section 1130.08 Subd E of the City Code. 8. The applicant shall submit the required information and modify the applicable plans to fully conform to the City Engineer's January 24, 2008, memorandum prior to the City executing the Final Plat. 9. The developer's agreement shall be prepared by the City Attorney and approved by the City Council and Developer prior to execution of the Final Plat. 10. The City shall approve the vacation of the existing easements on the property prior to the execution of the Final Plat. Resident Comment Staff has not received any official letters or telephone calls from property owners or occupants in regard to this planning case. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 1, 2008 IlMetro-inet.uslardenhillslPlanninglPlanning Cases 12008108-024 Christensen Estates Preliminary and Final Plat (Pending) 1100108 - PCReport - Christensen Estates Plat.doc Page 9 of 10 Notice A notice was sent to all properties within 350 feet of the subject property. Notice was also published in the Shoreview -Arden Hills Bulletin. Options and Recommended Motion Lanivae 1. Recommend Approval with Conditions: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 08-024 for a Preliminary and Final Plat of Christensen Estates based on the Endings of fact, the submitted plans, and amended by the ten conditions in the October 1, 2008, Planning Case report. 2. Recommend Approval as Submitted: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 08- 024 for a Preliminary and Final Plat of Christensen Estates based on the Endings of fact and the submitted plans in the October 1, 2008, Planning Case report. 3. Recommend Denial: Motion to recommend denial of Planning Case 08-024 for a Preliminary and Final Plat of Christensen Estates 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 08-024 for a Preliminary and Final Plat of Christensen Estates: a specific reason and information request should be included with a motion to table. Deadline for ALYencv Actions The City of Arden Hills received the completed plat application for this request on September 5, 2008. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statue 462.358 Subd 3C, the City shall approve or disapprove the Preliminary and Final Plat within 120 days following delivery of an application completed in compliance with the municipal ordinance by the applicant to the municipality, unless an extension of the review period has been agreed to by the applicant. The City must make a final decision on the application no later than January 3, 2009. Attachments A — Application and Supporting Materials B — City Engineer Review C — Air Photo and photographs of the site D — Plat Maps and Supplementary Plans City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 1, 2008 IlMetro-inet.uslardenhillslPlanninglPlanning Cases 12008108-024 Christensen Estates Preliminary and Final Plat (Pending) 1100108 -PC Report - Christensen Estates Plat.doc Page 10 of 10 Attachment A Application and Supporting Materials It ,-ii��HILLS October 1, 2008, Planning Commission Meeting ,--ARZEN HILLS 1245 West Highway 96 Arden Hills, Minnesota 55112 Telephone (651) 792-7800 Fax (651) 634-5137 www.ci.arder-hills.mn.us Planning Case No. 08-ID'Zq Submittal Date Cl "s - Application Completed Date 11 -5 - 5Accepted Accepted by Receipt Number Council Decision Council Decision Date 2008 LAND USE APPLICATION Aaalicant Information 0e 0-00* Applicant: ,%..�'..,��.!����.-.. L !�(�!_5 f&VJIPP%J Address: �6X /%,5�7 — .F5'i1Pd*YwL;;oct1 — Telephone Fax Nn • Ckle D) /e-,-7% --i�% ? j Email Address: )` %a�/ C�r2 l.$ � �CM�- Property Information Owner Address: Owner Telephone No. Other: Address of Propertv Involved Legal Description: {!Aa Pf �IZAlloi 11'3i�? f 4~&4 Property ID No.: Type of Used Zone: Property Acreage: Type of Request* LJ Rezoning ($450) LJ Apportionment of Assessments ($30) 1J Site Plan Review (Sign or Fence) ($250) LJ Comprehensive Plan Amendment ($450) LJ Vacation of Easement or Right -of -Way ($300) ❑ Conditional Use Permit or Amendment ($350) Final Plat ($200+$25 per lot) Master Planned Unit Development ($600+escrow) J Final Planned Unit Development ($200) J .Planned Unit Development Amendment ($350) LJ Zoning Code Amendment ($450) LJ Land Use Requests —Not Already Specified ($150) ❑ Appeal of Administrative Decision ($75) Ll Minor Subdivision (lot split/consolidation) ($325+escrow) LJ Preliminary Plat ($400 + $25 per lot +escrow) J Variance (Zoning Code) ($325) LJ Site Plan Review ($400) Revised: 12-12-07 Page 1 of 3 0 *Certain applications are subject to review and approval by the Rice Creek Watershed District. Contact RCWD directly at 763- 398-3070 for additional information. *The land use application fees do not cover building, sign, or other permit fees that may be required upon approval of a land use application. *All applications may be subject to additional fees for reimbursement of consultant costs associated with filing, reviewing, and processing of application in the form of an escrow to the City. Brief Description of Request (please also include a typed, detailed letter explainingt- he proje "."0,G(i l!/1 /V�IIBl��4 � � Lt'l�l�G� rVeb � k4 fur c� Cly04j2 �------------------------- - - ---- V V � l�J,� PA ib IL t�d4ec+adfwe,5 n1a Filing & Information Requirements The City requests that you make a pre -application meeting with the City Planner to discuss the application process, requirements, and deadlines. Unless waived by the City Planner or Planning Commission, a certified survey of the property is required for all applications. 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, and/or rescind prior action until all miscellaneous fees have been paid. Applicants are advised that an escrow deposit is required at the time of the submittal of the land use application to offset costs associated with the proposed project. Unused portions of an escrow are returned to the applicant upon successful implementation of an approved plan. Notice of Meetinq Attendance In order for the Planning Commission and the City Council to consider any application, the applicant or a designated representative must be present at the scheduled meeting. If not, the matter may be tabled until the next available agenda. Revised: 12-12-07 Page 2 of 3 Aaenda Deadline and Meetinq 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 6:30 PM, though please contact City Hall to verify the meeting date and time. City Council meetings are held typically the last Monday of the same month at 7:00 PM. Meetings are held in the Council Chambers at the City of Arden Hills, 1245 West Highway 96, Arden Hills, Minnesota 55112, unless otherwise stated. Applicants are advised that additional meetings and/or workshops are scheduled when necessary upon approval of the Planning Commission. 2008 SCHEDULE (*subject to change) Mav 5 1 June 4 1 1June 23 Jul 7 Au ust 6 TENTATIVE TENTATIVE S. . ::::::::::.:::::::::::::.:: :....:................................................................................:........................... :.::......:::...::::.::.::::.::::.::.::::.::.::.::.::.:.::::.::::.::.:.:::::.:::: PLANNING CITY COUNCIL October 27 X.:::::;::::. ;::: :: :::;::::::::::::::::::;:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.:.:::::::;: :::::::............::::.::.::....:::::.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::.............. a ...:.5 ::::::::..:................... :.:...................... Ot b..r............................................... ::.::.:::.:.::::::.::::::::::::::::::.::::::::::::::::::::::::::.:::::::::::::.:....... COMMISSION MEETING APPLICATION December 3 MEETING* DATE* DEADLINE Januar 26 (2009) (Generally held on the (Generally held on the DATE* first Wednesday at 6:30 p.m.) last Monday at 7:00 p.m.) ... : t.. De.e.b......................................................... :.:.::.::.::.::.::::::.:.::.::.::.::.::.::::::.:::.:::.....:::::::.:::::::::::::::::.:::::.:::::::::..::::............................................................................ an.a.::>:<:::>::>::>::: >::.:.::::::: >e:Sd:a::: <>::<>:>:::<:::>.:>:::>:::::<:>::::::::<::<:::............... :........................................................................::::..... '`` :.....:...:..::..::.:::::::..::::::::..:::::.:::.::::::::.::. January 7 February 6 February 25 ::::::::::.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::,:::::::::::.:::::::: ::.....:::.::.::.::::::::::::.::.::.:::.::.:::.:::::::::::::.:::.:.:: :::;.::::..::::::::::::::: :..::::::::::::::::::::::.:::::::::::::::........ ::::.:.:::::::::::.::.... .................................b.0.....:.................................................. .:.:: .... ::::::::::::::::::::::::::XX:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::. ::::.:::...::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::........Marr h... :.:..:::.::::::::::.:_:::.::::::::::::::.::.:..:...........................................:.:::::::. ::::::::::::::.: :...:....:............................................................:........ .. ... M.ar....h...::::.:. :..:.:.........::..::.:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.::.. :........ . March 3 April 2 April 28 Mav 5 1 June 4 1 1June 23 Jul 7 Au ust 6 August 25 4 ................................................ .. u.t.....:...:........................................... S. . ::::::::::.:::::::::::::.:: :....:................................................................................:........................... :.::......:::...::::.::.::::.::::.::.::::.::.::.::.::.:.::::.::::.::.:.:::::.:::: September 8 October 1 October 27 X.:::::;::::. ;::: :: :::;::::::::::::::::::;:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.:.:::::::;: :::::::............::::.::.::....:::::.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::.............. a ...:.5 ::::::::..:................... :.:...................... Ot b..r............................................... ::.::.:::.:.::::::.::::::::::::::::::.::::::::::::::::::::::::::.:::::::::::::.:....... ::: :. :. ::.:::::::::::::::::::. 5::: _::: orre.ne :::::::.....:...................................................: ::::::.::. ......................................................................... . ::::::::... iener 4 I` :. :::: ::::::::::::::.::.::::.:.:::::::.:::::::.:::::::::::::::::::,: November 5 December 3 December 22 December 1 Januar 7 (2009) Januar 26 (2009) Acknowledaement and Siqnature I acknowledge that I have read all of the information listed in the City of Arden Hills Land Use Application and fully understand that I am responsible for all costs incurred by the City related to the processing of this applic Property Owner Signature (Required) Date Applicant Signature (If different than the property owner) Date Please contact the City Planners Office at (651) 792-7800 if you have any questions regarding this application. Additional copies of this application form are available on the City's website: htt://www. ci. arden-hills. mn. us Revised: 12-12-07 Page 3 of 3 Attachment B City Engineer Rev40 iew 'It ��HILLS October 1, 2008, Planning Commission Meeting "000!!l �fi` EN HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: January 24, 2008 TO: Meagan Beekman, Planner I James Lehnhoff, City Planner FROM: Kristine Giga, Civil Engineer Greg Hoag, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Planning Case ##08-003 Christensen Estates Plan Review The following are comments based upon a review of the submitted plans: • The proposed project will require permits, including, but not limited to, NPDES, Rice Creek Watershed District and City Erosion Control permits. • Proposed utility (water and sewer service) locations and associated design details will need City Engineer review and approval prior to construciton. Each service shall be individually connected to the main line. Street restoration for utility connections must meet City standards. • While it appears that no proposed retaining wall exceeds four feet in height, more detail will need to be provided prior to construction. Any retaining walls four feet in height and taller must be certified by an engineer. • Please show the location and elevation of the emergency overflow of the southernmost wetland. • Per Zoning Code Section 1330.03, Subd. 5, B.1: "1. For lakes, ponds, and flowages, by (a) an elevation of available flood information and consistent with "Statewide Standards and Criteria for Management of Flood Plain Areas of Minnesota," or (b) placing the lowest floor at a level at least three (3) feet above the highest known water level. In those instances where sufficient data on known high water levels are not available, the ordinary high water mark shall be used." Please review the proposed building elevations for Lots 3 and 4, and adjust accordingly. The 100 - year flood elevation for the wetland has been listed as 881.3. The note stating "Minimum basement slab elevation = 883.83" should therefore be revised to 884.3. \\Metro-inet.us\ardenhills\PR&PW\Engineering\2007\Planning_Cases\07-015_ChristensenEstates\08-003_ChristensenEstates.doc Attachment C Air Photo and Photographs 'It EN HILLS October 1, 2008, Planning Commission Meeting : .. .. ::. :'+ f . .:.. .ti:.....; ... .: :+...... . A �:>'•#ice; .......... * ......... .......... ........... .......... . . . . . . . . .. . . . . ........ .......... bf.. �a .......... .......... .......... . ........ : .. .. ::. :'+ f . .:.. .ti:.....; ... .: :+...... . A A. at x r A A v. 2 h \ r Q' Q Z sF a `Q 2: 2♦ i 3:a x a a 2. s _ a c L s _ y - y c y c a s c c _ D C N C a s C R D C Q 3 Q /^ VJ ��cc s f F� V! A` W Q FSr:�:�:•i: �'r'is�i:•�:•i:�ii:�:}S�:�Y�i$ii?ii:?�: iiiiiii'ri'iiii: i'iiiiiiii:vii �i.'•ii ii!':'�Y�iv:ii:•iir :;x.«:•.'•yy;;yy:•:a:i???:�<:�'?i:::'f::f:i:�'3?33;`.3i:'•'x:y'' .r:•.. y; ..r. i..... i'riiiiiiiiiiii' .,.frf•::ny.r..yyo:•yyyyyrn:•.'•.Y:::::::::'t2:?::i`f's • �C�::>�:�:'t;•'F'r>'•:tiyVyry:::,:: y:: yya:::...;; <t;S:y::;�•;'<+; : V C L L ct Attachment D Plat Maps and Supplementary Plans lt- ,-A�ENHILLS October 1, 2008, Planning Commission Meeting ,--0 t ,,--ARZEN HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: October 1, 2008 PC Agenda Item 3.B TO: Planning Commission FROM: Meagan Beekman, Planner I SUBJECT: Planning Case #: 08-025 PUD Amendment and Site Plan Review Boston Scientific 4100 Hamline Avenue ATTACHMENTS: A — Application and Supporting Materials B — Air Photos and photographs C — Plans and Surveys Requested Action The applicants have requested a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment and Site Plan Review to construct a nitrogen storage tank and a liquid nitrogen vaporizer on the east side of Building 14 located on the north end of the Boston Scientific campus. BackLyround 1. Overview of Request: The applicants have requested a PUD (9'1h) Amendment and Site Plan Review to construct a nitrogen storage tank that would be ten feet in diameter and 28 feet in height. The tank would be located on a concrete pad, adjacent to an existing outdoor nitrogen storage tank, on the east side of Building 14, which is located on the north side of the campus (Attachment Q. In addition to the storage tank, and on an existing concrete pad, the applicant would install a liquid nitrogen vaporizer. The vaporizer would be five feet, nine inches square, and fifteen feet, nine inches in height. The tanks are necessary in order to meet the demand of Boston Scientific's manufacturing process. All of the new equipment would be surrounded City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 1, 2008 IlMetro-inet.uslardenhillslPlanninglPlanning Cases 12008 1 08-025 Boston Scientific PUD Amendment and Site Plan Review (Pending) 1100108 - PC Report - Boston Scientific PUD Amendment and Site Plan Rev a d Of 6 by fencing similar to what is currently surrounding the existing equipment in that area. Since the installation of the nitrogen tank and vaporizer were not included on the original approved Master Plan, a Master Plan PUD amendment and site plan review are needed for the proposal to go forward. Currently there are several storage tanks, a vaporizer, and generator to the east of Building B which house the liquid nitrogen that Boston Scientific uses for research and development of their products, including a 50 foot tall storage tank that was approved in October of 2004 by the City. Additionally, there is currently a 500 gallon tank and related equipment located east of Building 14 in the same location as the proposed tank. The applicant has submitted a letter addressing describing the project, a site plan, pictures of similar generator units and storage tanks on site, and pictures of the location for the proposed tank and vaporizer (Attachment Q. The following table lists the previous planning cases relating to the Boston Scientific Campus. Please note that Building 14 was previously referred to as Building N. Planning Request Comments CC Action Case 06-033 Master Plan PUD 8th2, 250 square foot addition to 11/27/06 (A) amendment Building N 06-024 Master Plan PUD 71F-10,225 square foot addition to 08/28/06 (A) Amendment Building N Expired Master Plan PUD 6t 06-010 Amendment perking Modifications 04/24/06 (A) Master Plan PUD 5th Installation of nitrogen 04-18 amendment generator, vaporizers, and 50- 10/25/04 (A) foot tall storage tank Master Plan PUD 4t 04-17 amendment Parking Modifications 07/12/04 (A) 04-13 Special Use Permit Satellite antennae for Building L 07/12/04 (A) 04-04 Site Plan Review Temporary Walkway 02/23/04 (A) Master Plan PUD 3r Moving Addition J from Phase 2 04-01 Amendment and Final to Phase 1 and slightly larger 02/23/04 (A) PUD Addition J 03-25 Master Plan PUD 2° Site layout change to allow for 09/29/03 (A) amendment Building N Addition 03-24 Site Plan Review Building N Addition 09/29/03 (A) 03-23 Site Plan Review Parking Ramp #1 09/29/03 (A) 03-07 Site Plan Review Building Addition I 03/31/03 (A) City of Arden hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 1, 2008 IlMetro-inet.uslardenhillslPlanninglPlanning CasesI2008108-025 Boston Scientific PUD Amendment and Site Plan Review (Pending) 1100108 - PC Report - Boston Scientific PUD Amendment and Site Plan ReVawkde � of 6 03-06 Site Plan Review Building L 03/31/03 (A) 03-05 Master Plan PUD 1St Site layout changes to Buildings 03/31/03 (A) Amendment I, K, L, and M Single Family Detached 03-04 Final Plat Final Plat and Vacation 06/30/03 (A) 02-25 Master Plan PUD, Guidant 3-phase Master Plan and 11/12/02 (A) Preliminary Plat Preliminary Plat 01-25 Sign Variances Lexington Avenue and Water 09/24/01 (A) Tower Signage 2. Surrounding Area: North Industrial I-1: Limited Industrial Office South (across County F) Industrial I-1: Limited Industrial Office / Utility RL-Residential / Office / PUD (Townhouses & Offices)/ Single Family Detached East (Shoreview) RH- Residential R-3:Multiple Dwelling Residential / Office /Multiple Residential Family West Low Density Residential R-1: Single Family Residential Single Family Residential 3. Site Data: Industrial Light Industrial / Office I-1: Limited Industrial / PUD Overlay 92.78 acres (4,042,646 square feet) N/A Highest elevation at NE of campus, slopes downward to the west and south. Plan Evaluation 1. General Zoning Regulations — Meets Requirement The Boston Scientific campus is located in an I-1: Limited Industrial Zoning District and has a Master Plan PUD Overlay which is the governing document for the campus. The addition of a nitrogen tank and vaporizer is not shown on the site plan for the Boston Scientific Master Plan PUD nor is it mentioned in the Boston Scientific Master Plan PUD submittals. The Master Plan PUD Amendment will ensure that the site plan is accurate and up to date. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 1, 2008 IlMetro-inet.uslardenhillsOanninglPlanning Cases 12008108-025 Boston Scientific PUD Amendment and Site Plan Review (Pending) 1100108 - PC Report - Boston Scientific PUD Amendment and Site Plan Rev ga d Of 6 The proposed plans comply with all zoning regulations for the I-1 District and the existing Master Plan PUD, including, but not limited to, height, lot coverage, and setbacks. The proposed tank would be located approximately 170 feet from the north property line and approximately 270 feet from the nearest residential property. 2. Screening (Section 1325.04 Subd. 4) — Meets requirement City code requires that loading service, utility, and outdoor storage areas shall be screened from all differing land uses. Natural materials, such as trees and landscaping may be used to meet screening requirements. The proposed storage tank would rise eight feet above the roofline of Building 14; however, the wooded areas to the west and north of the Boston Scientific property would effectively screen the tank entirely from view from either of these directions. It is estimated that the tree line is between 40 and 50 feet in height and is quite dense. This meets the requirements of the Zoning Code. 3. Traffic, Parking, Access, and Circulation ~Meets requirement The proposed project would have no impact on parking, access or circulation and would be located on what is presently green space. Boston Scientific estimates that the larger storage tank will result in a reduction of approximately 200 truck deliveries of nitrogen per year. 5. Noise — Meets requirement The proposed storage tank would have no direct impact on noise; however the reduced truck traffic may reduce noise from nitrogen deliveries. 6. Grading and Utilities — Meets Requirement The City Engineer has reviewed the plans provided by the applicant and did not believe that the proposed storage tank would impact the City of Arden Hills' utilities or infrastructure. FindinLs of Fact Staff offers the following findings for consideration: General Findings: 1. The proposed plans meet all of the requirements of the I-1 Zoning District 2. The proposed storage tank and vaporizer are permitted accessory uses and are also permitted by the Boston Scientific PUD Master Plan 3. The proposed storage tank and vaporizer are compatible with the character of the nature of the industrial area and will not adversely impact the surrounding properties City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 1, 2008 I Wetro-inet.uslardenhillsOanninglPlanning Cases 12008108-025 Boston Scientific PUD Amendment and Site Plan Review (Pending) 1100108 - PC Report - Boston Scientific PUD Amendment and Site Plan Re*age 5 of 6 4. The proposed storage tank and vaporizer would be effectively screened by the existing landscaping and trees located to the west and north of the site 5. The proposed storage tank and vaporizer would be visible from the Boston Scientific property to the south and east 6. The proposed plans are not anticipated to negatively impact traffic, parking, access, or circulation on the property 7. The proposed plans are not anticipated to have a negative impact on noise 8. The proposed plans would not impact drainage or grading on the site Notice Notice was published in the Arden Hills/Shoreview Bulletin and notice was prepared by the City and mailed to property owners within three -hundred fifty (350) feet of the subject property. Public Comments At this time the City has not received any comments from the public regarding this project. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of Planning Case #08-025 for a PUD (9th) Amendment and Site Plan Review at 4100 Hamline Avenue subject to the following four 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 and City Council. 2. All equipment and tanks shall be enclosed in a fence of similar height and materials to the existing fencing in that area. 3. A building permit shall be obtained for the project prior to installation. 4. A PUD Amendment drafted by the City Attorney shall be signed by the applicant prior to the issuance of any building permits. Options & Proposed Motion Lan2uaLye 1. Recommend Approval with Conditions: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 08-025 for a PUD (9th) Amendment and Site Plan Review at 4100 Hamline Avenue based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans as amended by the four conditions in the October 15 2008, planning case report City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 1, 2008 llMetro-inet.uslardenhillslPlanninglPlanning Cases 12008W-025 Boston Scientific PUD Amendment and Site Plan Review (Pending) 1100108 - PC Report - Boston Scientific PUD Amendment and Site Plan Re*Awgde c of 6 2. Recommend Apbroval as Submitted: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 08- 025 for a PUD (9th) Amendment and Site Plan Review at 4100 Hamline Avenue based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans as presented in the October 1, 2008, planning case report. 3. Recommend Denial: Motion to recommend denial of Planning Case 08-025 for a PUD (9tn) Amendment and Site Plan Review at 4100 Hamline Avenue based on the following findings: findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons fog denial and why those reasons cannot be mitigated. 4. Table: Motion to table Planning Case 08-025 for a PUD (9th) Amendment and Site Plan Review at 4100 Hamline Avenue: a specific reason and information request should be included with a motion to table. Deadline for Agency Actions The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on September 19, 2008. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statue, the City must act on this request by November 18, 2008 (60 days), unless the city provides the petitioner with written reasons for an additional 60 day review period. The City may, with the consent of the applicant, extend the review period beyond the initial 120 days. Attachments. A — Application and supporting materials B — Air photos and Photographs C — Plans and Surveys City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 1, 2008 I Wetro-inet. us lardenhills OanninglPlanning Cases 12008108-025 Boston Scientific PUD Amendment and Site Plan Review (Pending) 1100108 - PC Report - Boston Scientific PUD Amendment and Site Plan Re*age G 0f 6 Attachment A Supporting Documents from the Applicant 'It EN HILLS October 1, 2008, Planning Commission Meeting J EN HILLS 1245 West Highway 96 Arden Hills, Minnesota 55112 Telephone (651) 792-7800 Fax (651) 634-5137 www.ci.arder-hills.mn.us For Office Use Only Planning Case No. O$- d Submittal Date q-5 - c8 Application Completed Date Accepted byILL Receipt Number �( Council Decision Council Decision Date 2008 LAND USE APPLICATION Applicant Information Applicant: Address: A.,�. AVE, A-1 Telephone No.: "�'�- Other: Fax No.: 6l 5 !�:e zj�2 - Email Address: 4FJ I - Property Information Property Owner:- c Owner Address: Z// 4Z Owner Telephone No. Other: Address of Proeerty Involved: 1412 &-1 C.&z #/ /'r I MAI r// Legal Description: Property ID No.: Type of Use: Zone: - i TE6 m4o"'712 Property Acreage: C/ 2= 8 C Type of Request* Ll Apportionment of Assessments ($30) Ll Comprehensive Plan Amendment ($450) ❑ Conditional Use Permit or Amendment ($350) LJ Final Plat ($200+$25 per lot) LJ Master Planned Unit Development ($600+escrow) LJ Final Planned Unit Development ($200) Planned Unit Development Amendment ($350) LJ Zoning Code Amendment ($450) Ll Land Use Requests —Not Already Specified ($150) r-. LJ Rezoning ($450) LJ Site Plan Review (Sign or Fence) ($250) LJ Vacation of Easement or Right -of -Way ($300) V Appeal of Administrative Decision ($75) LJ Minor Subdivision (lot split/consolidation) ($325+escrow) Ll Preliminary Plat ($400 + $25 per lot +escrow) ❑ Variance (Zoning Code) ($325) Site Plan Review ($400) Revised: 12-12-07 Page 1 of 3 *Certain applications are subject to review and approval by the Rice Creek Watershed District. Contact RCWD directly at 763- 398-3070 for additional information. *The land use application fees do not cover building, sign, or other permit fees that may be required upon approval of a land use application. *All applications may be subject to additional fees for reimbursement of consultant costs associated with filing, reviewing, and processing of application in the form of an escrow to the City. Brief Description of Request (please also include a typed, detailed letter explaining the project) A4 kITAC Will Filing & Information Requirements The City requests that you make a pre -application meeting with the City Planner to discuss the application process, requirements, and deadlines. Unless waived by the City Planner or Planning Commission, a certified survey of the property is required for all applications. 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. Pavment 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, and/or rescind prior action until all miscellaneous fees have been paid. Applicants are advised that an escrow deposit is required at the time of the submittal of the land use application to offset costs associated with the proposed project. Unused portions of an escrow are returned to the applicant upon successful implementation of an approved plan. Notice of Meeting Attendance In order for the Planning Commission and the City Council to consider any application, the applicant or a designated representative must be present at the scheduled meeting. If not, the matter may be tabled until the next available agenda. Revised: 12-12-07 Page 2 of 3 Agenda 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 6:30 PM, though please contact City Hall to verify the meeting date and time. City Council meetings are held typically the last Monday of the same month at 7:00 PM. Meetings are held in the Council Chambers at the City of Arden Hills, 1245 West Highway 96, Arden Hills, Minnesota 55112, unless otherwise stated. Applicants are advised that additional meetings and/or workshops are scheduled when necessary upon approval of the Planning Commission. 2008 SCHEDULE (*subject to change) anua I February 6 1 February 25 I March 3 April 2 1 April 28 I May 5 1 June 4 1 June 23 July 7 1 August 6 1 Auqust 25 September 8 1 October 1 1 October 27 November 5 December 3 December 22 December 1 January 7 2009 January 26 2009 Acknowledgement and Signature I ackno g that I have read all of the information listed in the City of Arden Hills Land Use Application and ly unde tan at m responsible for all costs incurred by the City related to the processing of thi application. w Pr aner Signature equir d) Date Applicant Signature (If different than the property owner) Please contact the City Planners Office at (651) 792-7800 if you have any questions regarding this application. Additional copies of this application form are available on the City's website: http://www. ci. arden-hills. mn. us Revised: 12-12-07 Page 3 of 3 TENTATIVE TENTATIVE PLANNING CITY COUNCIL COMMISSION I MEETING APPLICATION MEETING* DATE* DEADLINE (Generally held on the (Generally held on the DATE* first Wednesday at 6:30 p.m.) last Mondav at 7:00 D.m.) anua I February 6 1 February 25 I March 3 April 2 1 April 28 I May 5 1 June 4 1 June 23 July 7 1 August 6 1 Auqust 25 September 8 1 October 1 1 October 27 November 5 December 3 December 22 December 1 January 7 2009 January 26 2009 Acknowledgement and Signature I ackno g that I have read all of the information listed in the City of Arden Hills Land Use Application and ly unde tan at m responsible for all costs incurred by the City related to the processing of thi application. w Pr aner Signature equir d) Date Applicant Signature (If different than the property owner) Please contact the City Planners Office at (651) 792-7800 if you have any questions regarding this application. Additional copies of this application form are available on the City's website: http://www. ci. arden-hills. mn. us Revised: 12-12-07 Page 3 of 3 Boston Scientific Corp. Installation of a larger Nitrogen tank Land Use Application -Description Request September 5, 2008 Description of Request (supplement) Boston Scientific is requesting a PUD Amendment and a Site Plan Review to allow the installation of a 10' diameter by 28' high Nitrogen storage tank situated on a 18' x 18' cement pad adjacent to an existing 22' x 36' cement pad (noted in blue on the layout page) . The tank will be located on the east side of building 14 at the north end. The purpose of the new tank is to meet the demand of our manufacturing processes. Currently there is a 500 gal. tank (noted in green) on the existing pad. A 5'9" wide by 5'9" deep by 15'9" high liquid nitrogen vaporizer will also be situated on the existing pad. The height of the building is 20', with a wooded area to the north that is approximately 40'-50' tall. This should provide effective screening of the new tank. The liquid Nitrogen is currently brought in by truck approximately every other day to meet our current needs. By allowing Boston Scientific to install a larger tank, truck deliveries will be reduced to a few times per month. This reduction of approximately 200 deliveries per year will also reduce truck noise on the surrounding residential areas. Attachment B Air Photo and Photographs of the Site 'It EN HILLS October 1, 2008, Planning Commission Meeting f :• ..•:•:�%%?,a65h.: :: ii:.iii::j?j?j':i:+.:...::::.::. .: ::::.i.:�::.�:::::::::: ;!';: .}ii}. .: :. di v t, 'f Y .............. •;:3 .......... {'J.[+!'.{ .:::: :...........: •: co ::::::•}:•}:{;iii ii i'.::: • f ii: cu •iii::ii$i}f:::F'': iii:}:4iii L cu :t:. . .:.i;. �$ii.;.;i.};; •:$iii. r.+.y^:8:• G'• f.;; .. :}+}:iii?::?�"• f•"�'ii. iiiiiiY :f'{::%iii•.}:•}'? f r.'•.�:{: {}: { ;}% {y{iii is i Now ., .:.: .... r. •r i.. ♦� ~J• �'�:?i:'::::i'fr.:.++riiiii'i:} t fi:;r.;tiitiii?iir'i::i>:• O �i'+�•:4'•\;vi+ {,>.iiii%iii{r � i:•5 Attachment C Plans and Surveys ,!r - EN HILLS October 1, 2008, Planning Commission Meeting lt6-_ ,,--ARZEN HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: October 1, 2008 PC Agenda Item 3 e C TO: Planning Commission FROM: Meagan Beekman, City Planner SUBJECT: Planning Case #: 08-026 Conditional Use Permit Amendment Arby's Restaurant Group 3751 Lexington Avenue ATTACHMENTS: A — Application and Supporting Materials B — Air Photos and photographs C — Property Survey and Plans Requested Action The applicants have requested a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Amendment to reconstruct the existing Burger King restaurant located at 3751 Lexington Avenue into an Arby's Restaurant. The reconfiguration would include minor alterations to the landscaping and signage; improvements to the parking lot, sidewalks, and lighting; and significant exterior modifications. Background 1. Overview of Request: The existing Burger King Restaurant operates under a Conditional Use Permit that was approved in 1988 (PC# 88-014). The applicants have requested a CUP amendment to reconfigure the existing business into an Arby's restaurant. The existing building would remain. The interior of the building would be significantly altered; however those changes do not impact the CUP Amendment application. In addition to the exterior modifications to the building, the applicant is proposing to restripe the parking lot to add additional accessible parking stalls, replace the sidewalks around the building to comply with ADA ramp City of -Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 1, 2008 IlMetro-inet.uslardenhillslPlanninglPlanning Cases 12008108-026 Arby's CUP Amendment (Pending) 1100108 - PCReport - Arbys CUP Amendment. doc Page 1 of 9 requirements, replace the existing menu board, add a canopy over the speaker area, replace all of the existing signage, paint the existing light poles, remove the exposed dumpster, and redo the landscaping. The Burger King restaurant and the Kennedy Transmission building, located immediately to the north, were both approved through CUPs in 1988. At the time the two properties were a single property and, while approved under different planning cases, were reviewed as a single site plan. In 1989 the properties were split; however the original site plan and approved CUPs are still in effect for both properties. The lot split; however, does make them separate parcels, and impacts the City's regulations regarding signage requirements. An amendment to the original CUP is required because of the exterior modifications that are proposed to the building and is not impacted by the new tenant, since the use of the building is not changing. The applicant has submitted a letter describing the proposed changes to the property (attachment A), a certified survey, landscaping plan, lighting plan, and a number of elevations of the site with the proposed changes (attachment Q. 2. Surrounding Area: 3. Site Data: Industrial Highway Convenience B-3 — Service Business District 1.25 Acres (54,450 sf) The parcel is generally flat City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 1, 2008 IlMetro-inet.uslardenhillsOanningOanning Cases 12008108-026 Arby's CUP Amendment (Pending) 1100108 - PC Report - Arbys CUP Amendment.doc Page 2 of 9 tre..L ................................ :::::::::::::::::.:::::::::::::::.:::........................................................... Vin.... �.............. ::::. North Industrial B-3 — Service Business District Neighborhood Commercial South Industrial B-3 — Service Business District Light Industrial and Heavy Industrial East (Shoreview) Institutional Retail Service - Institutional YMCA West Industrial B-4 — Retail Center District Light Industrial 3. Site Data: Industrial Highway Convenience B-3 — Service Business District 1.25 Acres (54,450 sf) The parcel is generally flat City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 1, 2008 IlMetro-inet.uslardenhillsOanningOanning Cases 12008108-026 Arby's CUP Amendment (Pending) 1100108 - PC Report - Arbys CUP Amendment.doc Page 2 of 9 Plan Evaluation 1. General Zoning Regulations Because the original site plan and CUP will continue to operate, with the exceptions of the proposed amendments, the current zoning code impacts only those aspects of the site plan that are proposed to change. Therefore, lot size, dimensions, lot coverage, landscaped area, and setbacks are not impacted by this proposal are in compliance with the original CUP. A. L — andscaping and Tree Preservation Meets Requirements Because the proposed plans do not include new building construction or expansion of the building or parking lot by more than ten percent, the City's landscaping and tree preservation requirements are not impacted. The original landscaping plan; however, continues to be in effect. The applicant has submitted a revised landscaping plan indicating the existing landscaping on the site with proposed changes. They are not proposing to remove any landscaping; however, they will clean up and prune the existing vegetation. They are proposing to install three additional trees on the site, and several shrubs and perennials. B. Lighting — Meets Requirements :k::'r,'tu •;w.£�'{.,\, :.': r.vW�•.+C...\. yr:'��v4.{.::.,.�+%a3:{.•. r�,cw:.:.......: �i�:.kk:. } { •:,':{'.;'., •', :: is ..{x. .r 4.:r: r:{<'{:n+Y.:y::L i}Xto }{h;�\\42ron}:};: •:`r`•Ki:%:iYi .t':tit}<::r?:`ii^'+i':}::<,Y ar :}� .•. +Lr.?}t.'+h,'4ti�4�a �ti:: }{,..��: vt+l',:;'::f.�{:..}:4i:i[ti{}{:3:{:i{:?}ii':i:{}i+[•.i{}.\4't�.t{4'.'•:{h{:'+f.'i: ay.'v ti:{}:}..{.�:h :•/ r 4. � v;?^. �:': {t"• 4. .:. \ t? vat•..:8 v: ''..+�: � •. �• : {i :��}{}+:t;v.'1,a �a. }:CC•. �'a.. v.;�`.^•'ti �`fk :Cy :\ ...off,:>:.:.�•?�.�.kti•�t?:t•::: :..}:•::�h�:\'E E�j: }:• .:: r.?}:•:{•}:{•?:{•Ah..........::w:;?:r •?::::::.::\\.?:h.:::.{•?:•?:•?:•}:{:titifi?:ti.}:•: }:�•:'v\.}}?:{'}:•}:{CY{i•::•: v: x� :..a.:.v::.v:v::. .�:v�,::{•X•?}:{:::•Y4 1. Minimum Lot Area (SO 13,000 2. Minimum Lot Size (ft, width/depth)) 100-130 3. Height (ft.) — Principal Structures 35 4. Height (ft.) — Accessory Structures 15 5. Lot Covered by Structure 40% 6. Min. Landscape Lot Area 25% 7. Minimum Building Setbacks ft Front yard 50 Rear Yard (Principle) 20 Rear Yard (Accessory) 10 Side Yard Interior - Principal Min/total both yards on lot) 20/40 Side Yard Interior - Accessory 10 Side Yard Corner 50 The location and arrangement of lighting on the site will not change. The applicants are proposing to paint the existing light poles and replace the heads. The applicant has submitted a photometric plan. It is not anticipated that the intensity or direction of the lighting will be impacted by the proposed changes. C• Screening — Meets Requirements All mechanical operating equipment would be fully screening from view. The exterior dumpster would be removed and relocated within an existing garage located in the rear of the property. The dumpster would be required to remain within the screened area. D. Parking and Traffic —Meets Requirements City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 1, 2008 I (Metro-inet.uslardenhillslPlanninglPlanning Cases 12008108-026 Arby's CUP Amendment (Pending)1100108 - PCReport - Arbys CUP Amendment. doc Page 3 of 9 The number of parking stalls would not be impacted by the proposed changes to the exterior of the building and site. The number of approved parking stalls from the original CUP would remain. The number of accessible stalls would increase to meet ADA parking requirements, through striping and signage. In addition, the interior of the restaurant would be reconfigured and would involve a net reduction in the number of seating capacity from 100 existing seats, to 88 proposed seats. Staff does not anticipate that parking will be impacted by the proposed modifications to the site. The on-site traffic circulation is not anticipated to be impacted because the parking lot is not being reconfigured in any way. Traffic to the site is not anticipated to be impacted because the use is not proposed to change. 2. Additional Minimum Requirements for Drive -In Businesses, Fast Food Restaurants and Automobile Service Stations. (Section 1325.04) A. Landscaping (Meets Requirements). A lot to be used for drive-in business, fast food restaurant or automobile service station purposes shall be landscaped at least to the following depths from each lot line: a. Twenty (20)feetfrom the front lot line, except for approved access drive. b. Ten (10) feet from each side lot line. c. Fifteen (15)feetfrom rear lot line. B. Electronic Devices (Meets Requirements). Electronic devices such as loudspeakers or devices, and similar instruments, shall not be located within fifty (SO) feet of any adjacent lot regardless of use or zoning district. C. Snow Storage (Meets Requirements). Adequate area shall be designed for snow storage such that clear visibility shall be afforded from the property to any public street. D. Screening (Does Not Meet Requirements). A suitable screening fence shall be erected along all property lines except those which are also public right-of-way lines. Said fence shall be of a type and design approved by the Council. Planting of a type approved by the Council may also be required in addition to or in lieu of fencing. E. Design (Meets Requirements). The design of all structures shall be compatible with other structures in the surrounding area. F. Signs (Meets Requirements). No permanent or temporary signs visible from a public street shall be erected without approval from the Council. G. Traffic Circulation (Meets Requirements). No site plan shall be approved which will in any way constitute a hazard to vehicular or pedestrian circulation. H. Access (Meets Requirements). Access shall be to public streets from at least two (2) points on the subject premises. A divided entry with a center island may meet the requirements of this provision. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 1, 2008 IlMetro-inet.uslardenhillslPlanninglPlanning Cases 12008108-026 Arby's CUP Amendment (Pending) 1100108 -PC Report-Arbys CUP Amendment.doc Page 4 of 9 3. Conditional Use Permit — Section 1355.04 Subd 3 Section 1355.04 Subd 3 of the Arden Hills Zoning Code lists the criteria for evaluating a Conditional Use Permit. The Planning Commission and City Council shall consider the effect of the proposed use upon the health, safety, convenience and general welfare of the owners and occupants of the surrounding land, in particular, and the community as a whole, in general, including but not limited to the following factors: A. Existing and anticipated traffic and parking conditions; B. Noise, glare, odors, vibration, smoke, dust, air pollution, heat, liquid or solid waste, and other nuisance characteristics; C. Drainage; D. Population density; E. Visual and land use compatibility with uses and structures on surrounding land; adjoining land values; F. Park dedications where applicable; and the G. Orderly development of the neighborhood and the City within the general purpose and intent of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Development Plan for the City. 4. Signage The applicant is proposing to replace the existing on-site directional signs, menu reader board and wall signs with those compatible to an Arby's restaurant. The proposed wall signage would total 80 square feet. City Code permits up to 80 square feet of wall signage. The Arby's neon "hat" sign would be located on the interior of the building and would, therefore, be considered a window sign. Window signs may not total more than 35 percent of the total window area on a building fagade, but do not require a permit. The neon sign would count towards window sign coverage and reduce the amount of other window signage available in the future. The on-site directional signs would be considered auxiliary signs and are permitted, with a sign permit, and cannot exceed eight square feet in size. Currently, the Burger King restaurant shares a free-standing pylon sign with the property to the north. While this was required at the time of approval because the two parcels were a single lot, the sign became non -conforming when the lots split, since it is now located on the property to the north. The fast-food restaurant is now entitled to a separate free-standing sign on its own property. Arby's restaurant is proposing a monument style sign that meets the requirements of the current zoning code. The monument would be located on the fast-food restaurant property. The existing Burger King pylon sign would be required to be removed. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 1, 2008 IlMetro-inet.usWrdenhillslPlanninglPlanning Cases 12008108-026 Arby's CUP Amendment (Pending)1100108 - PCReport - Arbys CUP Amendment. doc Page 5 of 9 5. Additional Information The City Engineer and Building Official have reviewed the project and have no objections to the proposal. Findings of Fact Staff offers the following twenty findings for consideration: General Findings: 1. Fast-food restaurants are a conditional use in the B-3 Zoning District 2. The existing fast-food restaurant operates under an approved CUP (PC# 08-014) 3. An amendment to the CUP is required because of the proposed exterior modifications to the building and site 4. The proposed plans do not impact the City's landscaping or tree preservation requirements 5. The applicant is proposing to amend the approved landscaping plan by adding three trees and several shrubs and perennials 6. The proposed plans are not anticipated to impact lighting on the site because the heads of the lights are only proposed to be replace and the light poles painted 7. The mechanical equipment would be screened from view 8. The exterior dumpster would be removed and relocated to the existing garage. The dumpster would be kept within the garage and therefore screened from view Minimum Requirements for Drive -In Businesses, Fast Food Restaurants and Automobile Service Stations Findings: 9. The lot is landscaped to approximately 40 feet from the front property line, 20 feet from the side property line, and 15 feet from the rear property line. 10. The drive-thru speaker is located fifty feet from the nearest property line. 11. Adequate snow storage is available because the parking lot is not being reconfigured 12. A screening fence is not currently shown on the proposed plans but is required by the Zoning Code 13. The design of the structure is compatible in the B-3 Service Business District 14. The signs have been included in the CUP Amendment application for review and approval from the Planning Commission and City Council. 15. No traffic or circulation hazard is anticipated because the parking lot and drive aisles are not proposed to be modified. 16. A divided entry with a center island is provided on site with access onto Lexington Avenue. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 1, 2008 IlMetro-inet.uslardenhillslPlanninglPlanning Cases12008108-026 Arby's CUP Amendment (Pending) 1100108 - PCReport - Arbys CUP Amendment.doc Page 6 of 9 On the Conditional Use Permit Evaluation Criteria: 17. The proposed plan would not have any impact on traffic or parking conditions because the parking lot, entrance, and drive aisles are not proposed to be changed 18. The proposed plan will not produce any permanent noise, glare, odors, vibration, smoke, dust, air pollution, heat, liquid or solid waste, and other nuisance characteristics 19. The proposed plan will not impact drainage because the drainage is not being altered 20. The proposed plan will not impact population density because the proposed use is not residential 21. The proposed plan is not expected to have a significant impact on visual and land use compatibility with uses and structures on surrounding land or adjoining land values because the use is not changing and the visual impacts of the proposed changes are an improvement to what is existing 22. Park dedications are not applicable 23. The proposed plan does not conflict with the general purpose and intent of the zoning code or the Comprehensive Development Plan for the City. 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 of the subject property. Public Comments At this time the City has not received any comments from the public regarding this project. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of Planning Case #08-026 for a Conditional Use Permit Amendment at 3751 Lexington Avenue subject to the following eleven 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 and City Council. 2. A Conditional Use Permit Amendment drafted by the City Attorney shall be signed by the applicant, and the property owner, prior to the issuance of any building permits. 3. A building permit shall be obtained for all proposed building and site alterations. 4. The number of accessible parking stalls shall meet ADA requirements City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 1, 2008 IlMetro-inet.uslardenhillslPlanninglPlanning Cases 12008108-026 Arby's CUP Amendment (Pending) 1100108 - PCReport -Arbys CUP Amendment.doc Page 7 of 9 5 . The applicant shall install a wood screening fence, subject to the approval of the City Planner, along the south and west property lines that screens the drive-thru area from adjacent properties. 6. The applicant shall repair any damaged curb and gutter on their property. 7. The applicant shall not remove any trees on the site and shall conform to the approved Landscaping Plan. 8. The applicant shall remove the exposed refuse dumpster and relocate it to the existing garage. The dumpster shall remain screened within the garage. 9. The existing Burger King sign located on the free standing pylon sign shall be removed. 10. All proposed wall and monument signs shall require a sing permit prior to installation. 11. The neon window sign shall constitute 18 square feet of the permitted 3 8 square feet of window signage. Options & Proposed Motion Language 1. Recommend Approval with Conditions: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 08-026 for a Conditional Use Permit Amendment at 3751 Lexington Avenue based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans as amended by the eleven conditions in the October 1, 2008, planning case report 2. Recommend Approval as Submitted: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 08- 026 for a Conditional Use Permit Amendment at 3751 Lexington Avenue based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans as presented in the October, 2008, planning case report. 3. Recommend Denial: Motion to recommend denial of Planning Case 08-026 for a Conditional Use Permit Amendment at 3751 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 08-026 for a Conditional Use Permit Amendment at 3751 Lexington Avenue: a specific reason and information request should be included with a motion to table. Deadline for Agencv Actions The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on September 15, 2008. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statue, the City must act on this request by November 14, 2008 (60 days), unless the City provides the petitioner with written reasons for an additional 60 City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 1, 2008 IlMetro-inet.uslardenhillslPlanninglPlanning Cases 12008108-026 Arby's CUP Amendment (Pending) 1100108 - PCReport -Arbys CUP Amendment. doc Page 8 of 9 day review period. The City may, with the consent of the applicant, extend the review period beyond the initial 120 days. Attachments A — Application and supporting materials B — Air photos and Photographs C — Certified Survey and Plans City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 1, 2008 I IMetro-inet. us lardenhillslPlanninglPlanning Cases 12008108-026 Arby's CUP Amendment (Pending) 1100108 - PCReport -Arbys CUP Amendment. doc Page 9of9 Attachment A Supporting Documents from the App1icant 'It ,-1��HILLS October 1, 2008, Planning Commission Meeting EN HILLS 1245 West Highway 96 Arden Hills, Minnesota 55112 Telephone. (651) 792-7800 Fax (651) 634-5137 www.ci.arder-hills.mn.us Planning Case No. O$° Submittal Date Application Completed Date Accepted by a Receipt Number Council Decision Council Decision Date 2008 LAND USE APPLICATION Applicant Information Applicant: , I , Address: 8++.S...9w�& 1011 *s1r, Ul"fu a KLo w4o&S - - --- - ---- ---- - --- ---- ------ - -------------- ----------- ------------ Telephone_ p) ' -F Email Address: r Property Information Other: Property Ol,vvner: 5�ou Liv ml irA Ua6Uhe LimlicA Rax-buA!shL0 �r Owner Address: Z Rd. E*& V Owner Telephone No. s ► Other: 05 Address of • • -lnvolved:____Slg I J"iAa+D11 11 No,, AMM 1416 Sr. -U Legal Description: 5Mbon 21 T-omffl 3D &mtp I�125 k ak N f+ of E Property ID No.: 2�i . 3O. 20$'1 (-4 L Ob21J�'ZS.Ia f'#* Of ,�i4 (,.�{,,;� Hwy Type of Use: AIIIII Afi6e&1Lv or .Set. 21 1'r '3? ILn U Zone: ��� SfjeyJCL &j1LV"r2 D(SWc* Property Acreage: Type of Request* Ll Apportionment of Assessments ($30) ❑ omprehensive Plan Amendment ($450) Conditional Use Permit or Amendment ($350) Final Plat ($200+$25 per lot) Ll Master Planned Unit Development ($600+escrow) LJ Rezoning ($450) LJ Site Plan Review (Sign or Fence) ($250) LJ Vacation of Easement or Right -of -Way ($300) ❑ Final Planned Unit Development ($200) LJ Planned Unit Development Amendment ($350) Ll Zoning Code Amendment ($450) LJ Land Use Requests -Not Already Specified ($150) ❑ Appeal of Administrative Decision ($75) LJ Minor Subdivision (lot split/consolidation) ($325+escrow) Ll Preliminary Plat ($400 + $25 per lot +escrow) Ll Variance (Zoning Code) ($325) ❑ Site Plan Review ($400) Revised: 12-12-07 Page 1 of 3 *Certain applications are subject to review and approval by the Rice Creek Watershed District. Contact RCWD directly at 763- 398-3070 for additional information. *The land use application fees do not cover building, sign, or other permit fees that may be required upon approval of a land use application. *All applications may be subject to additional fees for reimbursement of consultant costs associated with filing, reviewing, and processing of application in the form of an escrow to the City. Brief Description of Request (please also include a typed, detailed letter explaining the project) Filing & Information Requirements The City requests that you make a pre -application meeting with the City Planner to discuss the application process, requirements, and deadlines. Unless waived by the City Planner or Planning Commission, a certified survey of the property is required for all applications. 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. Pavment 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, and/or rescind prior action until all miscellaneous fees have been paid. Applicants are advised that an escrow deposit is required at the time of the submittal of the land use application to offset costs associated with the proposed project. Unused portions of an escrow are returned to the applicant upon successful implementation of an approved plan. Notice of Meeting Attendance In order for the Planning Commission and the City Council to consider any application, the applicant or a designated representative must be present at the scheduled meeting. If not, the matter may be tabled until the next available agenda. Revised: 12-12-07 Page 2 of 3 --- ��hl:�� fig• s -UM-141 Don Soukup 952-471-7676 p.2 Agenda Deathine and Meetina Schedule The deadline for submittal of land use applications is required according to the schedule outlined below. There are no exceptsons; 'PlanningCommission meetings are typically held on the first Wednesday of each month at 5.30 pM • -thou h please contact City Hall to verity the meeting date and time. City Council 9 • held typically the last Monday of the same month at 7:00 PM. Meetings are held in the meetings are h typ Y Arden Hilts, Minnesota 55112, Council Chambers at the City of Arden Hills, 1245 West Highway 96, unless otherwise stated. Applicants are advised that additional meetings and/or workshops are scheduled when necessary upon approval of the Planning Commission. 2008 SCHEDULE (*subject to change] Acknowied_.i91cnaSue 1 acknowledge that 1 have read all of the information listed in the City of Arden Hills Land Use Application a un erstanc t I am r po IN fo a costs curred by e C relat to the processing of th a plicApn. A 1W e- proer g ai re ( e re Date ,7 Applicant Signature (If different than the proerty owner) Date rs ,� �SYat54. '361�1Q Please contact the City Planners Office at (651) 792-7800 if you have any questions regarding this application. Additional copies ofthis application fon» are available on the CiVs website: htWL/A ww_ ci_ ardffl-hills. MO. us Revised: 1212-07 Page of L Alk architecture •planning •interior design 219 North Second St. Suite 301 Minneapolis, MN 55401-1454 p 612.338.6677 f 612.338.2995 www.cmarch.com Fort Worth, TX Minneapolis, MN Dallas, TX Austin, TX College Station, TX Oklahoma City, OK Lawrence, KS September 05, 2008 City of Arden Hills 1245 West Highway 96 Arden Hills, MN 55112 RE: Arby's Restaurant- 3751 Lexington Ave. N. Project No. 08127.008 Dear City of Arden Hills: Arby's Restaurant Group is proposing a tenant up -fit on the existing Burger King property at 3751 Lexington Ave. N. The shell of the building will remain largely untouched with the exception of the front (please see the existing and proposed renderings). Some interior demolition of partition walls will occur where necessary to meet Arby's needs. As for the site, the parking lot will remain. Two new accessible parking stalls will be added with new signage. The sidewalks will be replaced and will include a new ADA ramp near the accessible stalls. The existing menu board and speaker will be replaced with new Arby's menu board and speaker with overhang (please refer to photo). All other existing site signage will be refaced and painted to match typical Arby's standard signs (please refer to photos). Building signage will be replaced with Arby's signage (see rendering). Two areas of concrete along the drive-thru will be replaced and include new sensors. The existing light poles within the parking lot will be repainted and have their heads replaced. The up -lights at the flag pole will be replaced. The existing dumpster sitting out on the sidewalk will be removed and one will be kept in the garage instead. Lastly, the landscaping will be redone as well (landscaping plan will be sent shortly). Sincerely, Jere y Nelson C.M. ARCHITECTURE, P.A. Attachment B Air Photo and Photographs of the Site EN HILLS October 1, 2008, Planning Commission Meeting ::::::.. �\ \ . ,: .,{: :::................... r: ;;> :$::> ................. .:.}: f.,:' :jN r.,f r„a� '<:> :. ... �.. . fr . :,,::•: :.:.f d�;.}_ ::$:$, ><><'>:; :}/.. ;;+ v:::::::: n, .... n,.... .::r?: ..v:::::.v.v: vn,,+ v .. {:.},v:;::?:?::{#::: ;n1 1. : :. vv:.v,,,,.:: v :..,. , .v. ... .: :::.... ................. :.........:- j.:.........$:,: {$i..:$$$$$$$$$${$} : ,, Y.}:: , .. ry,2y,+. ;h:y,.F:..;:'. is ................................. v ....... .... .......... »,+'»: v ,.:..,:. . {..\, .: .,. :..., nv: n•;S:ir.: , ....-,.- }:::f , .. , ,. ::: y'v. ... ::...... ... ....;$$$$j$$:,$;:$f:$;:{i::::,:j{t::{:: ,:::: ,:... :{{::v.v?:::: '?::ia}ti.:i:ii$:� \ .x....,..{. Sr:.{;.;i$vti:}.... .: }:'. \•.:v, ,: v ..:::::.:::::::::: :.: { * ', ....... ... ................. C v \v .. ............. ....... ..............:::::::.:.... }:,}:,}}}}}}}}}}}:,}:,i:.i::::::' ............................ :::::::::::::.v::::.:v::::.: \'.•; .:\:1.:? ti'.a..:$${{.,v$;n:??!rf,.{li::. :•}:^.}'4fiff Ji{`vr'` \4: }.v>.vn\,..,,,Clv,{{$ J�#%\{:ff.:,f. S n.:{. %.::% :lf{l }:f .:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.::.:.:.:.::*....%%%........'. ,:,..0 r::;'}}$$,R,W..•nf..'>4::.2v y� #"ll , f rI :\ +;�'$G`v'{{'$$$.f i%h: aid: ni: y ti 5t � {/, fF \:�J$$$${::$$::$.!:$::$<::i$: S':- .. .:: ::::: v$i::.%........ S}S}::4:,}}}......,. C,;{:, •.2}.'{;{{i: �.Gd!rtr;i:% $:l:.�fv}^�..::a. J r $ f SS ` .' \ : y'M�r. Y.: . f ) #:sa is>x::$ -, / .- . f .: {fi "»: z... . '#}:.}..:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.......%'. : : ». »3Yi:f•. ` ' $# ''.....................I Jf}} ca r' d. ? „ ",r:n . A �}/ -g $ :r f' 5:::. .a.} .%}': �c . •:. r.:� , ....,,"..,......... .,.,......#:: ':...... ............. ..............".... ............ ...................... { :::�:> .. %""'*""'*”' """", .a } X.A, /T. i7ff: ` q {.{ I -in 1. $ f f„ ...:: .: :::$, :: fj: fi a 4, r. : F. . :. w:. ?..nn•. . . 3:1�{r . •n �:a ;,�. .4.{ #n. fy f :h4 k, .xlr � } :n. r . :n . .: f.: x:,{{{{{{.:hv.: X., : r }$i: f{: nti;;<kv.+c#S'x`„}}2n+:fffff f jjjj •}•.} f� :. i..:.:•: ,;fff .. F::,},: {: {.,... y,.. }:.. {: }{:Jf,�F : r5f v:}n :i•a\{: {: { v h'#-, .. f %/f h }"j y� f. . x�.A. I. :C < "'�I S' :.i\.{$: i,+`:X{;{#iN,... J]€;>•f f / f {I }"}tiy :} {;C`${' $ - . 1 �f off ' 1, }i �� 1 I {{ i .' C$ :<:' `i:..':.: `�S(2:$$!$ 4.+i:4 v't.#%� f%;$% %� , 1."'.S$xxy,%f ff 1 : }} }: 1',.., v.i: "v .... �':\;.; � ::i:: :Y :{.::;';\:i :::t/'fiiFdfiiiY,:i �$i{$f: r 2:y?o-.+{.Sky}G, y:�C:FLf,1 y,y\• $;: fff} f : '.` 'SES }t';� \ 42 l'ifs ;`. T .... f 0. I 11$fff y: k #''r f f f� INN". i, +> . ::::::::::: , 1. I �, `i'r;� M/�{f$ , 'f f'. yA i•Jfr {yfr$ff/ ��� tSj t , fff f� �` { f" . ,��C• t,.' . f i fy tI�,-*. ... . F...�. {rr r # FFr fl dJ '{ E I I � ,. S .55 T: 1 . ... } ..., . : v .. ,. f,; /� rI. m r� 8 , r ' ...... , , ..:::.— ........... ... . : ... .. ..... .. .:: % n. 1, I a>'� f� k� �t � I 1. ' :of / } loci` $' \ 22gg222 a ° } `{# 2 ».. <I .. .. ::` ;. .. fi. I { ... " \ -----:::vr•: n!v.'i.w : noMo000W(;Op00pp0000j�. a — 7, , ,—.. . I . . . .. $. I ................. I..", � :� , , � '4$�' '9 SS J f ": C� im - .. � -R 1. , ,//'{ 3 :1 - I {.•.n:•. K: :::: .:, :.t: {:. r f ,.,... :ii,{ :. .. .$ ;:::.: S, r%: f/ lf/L - %'f :j:'` #;$%/ti$/ f f:Y ,. C v \v .. \r q 2 '' {{%%': C: 'l $ /, ih , {:r .$%':' ` aa {io '... :>; ,; e. . . �k' S { fi . -. I'llc. t A�yp� ... .. .. ...... R vin. 6 A': } :`CNH;`:: .:.,l 2. c,3 T. .v,♦ 4} I. ✓/ f , { rf. W r f. f f 3' / f V f} f fr' f� f r '{ t F1 f/ : 1 ) fi :: .' \ : y'M�r. Y.: . :::\C \ a ✓�ff l� �f f f' f' f b IX .2'. . r . i� .: \. .a: f F. 4 2: ., .. X.... }::: ,. . :;}}., . .....,..., ry i \v . :4 { f ''>. ..:.: ,.,:.,::,,,,:,}:::: ::: .. ......... ....:.:.:::..::.:: ..:.::::::.:..,...,... .\`: v:J: fi v. ♦. I ,,:Z: f x f ((` F., p' t' c nF .c .S 2•+:: { 1. > , 3 $w,-: I . Z. -0? ¢'';'. ^. „ :. \ "......... jj 5 '. F :C .. .3 v'+'C..` \, . : . :. : , ...', Y R� >. ?'1. :.. x. . .,. �' <.1. �.,11 a . i, +> . .... ...... .:..v::.v::::.v:::v::::,: n•.::.::vn:::v.:v:::: f /f f f f / f {r :::::: ,:: :::..:::::::.,..::::::::..:.:...............:.:: >:;g.}.}. 'r'.{�. \\ \ '.: {?'•X.w,}}}}:{v}'.v.}:. . .,.. R a ., e . i r.• ,t� I r :.: v::.v.v::;: :..v v;}: •}}::•}}})}}}iii::vff•'f!•. .................... f.:rff. .............................. , ............... .: { \ l }-' ':. ... .. ,. ..n.. ... ........ . , . , , r: fi ...................:::::..:..., .. , ......... \ .. . i L \ ;:n:: ?$ f / f \ r f �h .................. ..: v:::: , rf ...............1. h:: h:} ( ,\. v q( . % . ..:��.. .: • .............. .... ,:.::::::::::: .. ..:.. ...... ............ ....» :. .., :.:..v::::::::,:.:,::::::::: ...,.,.. ... v:;::::::: •:::::xx fff:_. ...•............. ,. .................�.::A. ....... n...... .,...:::...,v.. n\ .:,..v::.}..: f f :..:v ,»�.. ..::, :. f.. s:. . ... .a.... ..,.......... .. .. :.,.. ,v:::., .}: ti +;;,\.. .. :.:. ........ .::::-X... •, f,::}a ......: ., :i:i':•;y,}::::{.;.,:: {;.v .... .. :} ay........ 'v.\,iii}:: '.f::. \ .. .. .. .... .. ... ...:.... :. \. . �i:�33:c:?�33: f ..................... . x t C i{:.: #:: \: \.+.., . }� \ : C r� :` a` 1 :::::::.: �. ,.,, ...........::. .,r:ii: i.�. ... .... ..............:::::::.nv:; : :.::.: .: ., .. X.... }::: ,. . :;}}., . .....,..., ry ..:.: ,.,:.,::,,,,:,}:::: ::: .. ......... ....:.:.:::..::.:: ..:.::::::.:..,...,... }.} ., ` ..:....... : :. . Jh S \ \ \ A A'. \ 4 C \ 4 A ti, A pqf •. 8' 1 • { ......................... :. ; ??... W M:. 4 S ( " \4� r { ... .. ...... .:. ... if :,, }„ Kf ., \vh.. ,, \. \ F.. 1 .:. :.:.: .: .. .. .. .:... :.:.:: v.::.:.:::::::::: .: W. % ...,..,:; 22 ., .v. �:.�:.:.:.:::.... . , .. ...........::: v::...... ::......... . ,,,.,.... .. : '. :::. ; ':" :: ,. :: 1 1 . ... } ..., . : v .. ,. \. ...... , , ..:::.— ........... ... . : ... .. ..... .. .:: % n. 1, I .. }}:. ... :\. } : .1: n Il •`::.: X. ' ....:.:.....:.. , - 1 1 • `:.. '.'. .,, ::::.':;:::'..... : .: ::':::?. . ': i ' 1 Attachment C Plans and Surveys It EN HILLS October L 2008, Planning Commission Meeting ARBY'S RESTAURANT ARDEN HILLS, IVIN 1 1=619 P=61y N 8 La21=01Y 1=059 .-1 4 a 6 E01,11 END VIEW 31=611 Logo -Shaped Sign Head Graphics: Arby; Arb "s Side A Side B Primary Secondary Sign Orientation: Low side of hat points M. toward building Airbus 2 SINGLE FACE B-8 SIGNS FABRICATED BRONZE FLUROPON ALUMINUM WITH #2793 RED PLASTIC FACES. INTERIOR ILLUMINATION WITH L.E.D. 31.64 SQ.FT 6" CHANGE LETTERS ON A WHITE BACKGROUND 24.0 SO. FT BRICK BASE BY OTHERS TOTAL: 55.6 sq. ft [:DOUBLE FACE ILLUMINATED FREE-STANDING DISPLAY *SIGN HEIGHT AS PER CITY SIGN CODE AFL - ------ A. NOTICE: ALL ARTWORK REMAINS THE PROPERTY OF ADVANCED SIGN SCALE: IN .011 sm CO. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, UNLESS SPECIFIED IN WRITING 1/4 =11 ADVANCED rbj MODEL NO. j M DzibARBY'S S15�N PROGRAM 1DRAWING NO. 908-884 9-15-018] Ita.— ­---ARZEN HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: October 1, 2008 PC Agenda Item 3.D TO: Planning Commission FROM: James Lehnhoff, Community Development Directo SUBJECT: DRAFT Master Plan for the New Lake Johanna Boulevard (B2 District Small Area Plan) Requested Action Recommend Approval of the Master Plan for the New Lake Johanna Boulevard (B2 District Small Area Plan) to the City Council and provide comments, questions, and suggestions. Note: The attached version of the draft Plan is the same version that was presented to the City Council on September 15, 2008. There will be some changes made to the draft Plan based on that discussion; however, those changes are not reflected in the attached draft. PlanninLy Process At the end of November 2007, the City instituted a moratorium on development and redevelopment in the B2 Zoning District in order to create a long-term redevelopment vision for this area. The B-2 Zoning district includes those properties on County Road E between Highway 51 and Lexington Avenue, on Connelly Avenue, and Pine Tree Drive. Significant progress has been made since last November and particularly since May. With great assistance from the community and the steering committee, a master plan that addresses the complex issues of transportation, land use intensity, appearance, accessibility, and long-term viability has been drafted. After a series of six committee meetings and a community meeting, the steering committee has reviewed the above issues and come to a consensus on moving this draft plan forward to the Planning Commission, City Council, and to the overall community for review. The materials presented at each of the steering committee meetings are available online at www.ci.arden- hills.mn.us/smallareaplan. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 1, 2008 Uhdocshah WHdatalPlanningl Community DevelopmentlB2 Small Area Plan Meetings Vct 12008 PCMeeting1100108 -B2 Small Area Plan - PC Memo.doc Page 1 of 4 To help facilitate the meetings and guide the planning process, the City Council hired Bill Weber of McCombs Frank Roos Associates (MFRA) to assist Staff in preparing this plan. The MFRA planning team included three sub -consultants: Maxfield Research for the residential/commercial market study, Spack Consulting for the transportation analysis, and Hay Dobbs for the urban design portion. The steering committee is comprised of 15 members of the community, including residents, businesses, and property owners. The planning process included evaluating existing conditions, creating a long-range redevelopment vision and guiding principles, addressing transportation questions, evaluating market potential, reviewing land uses, and drafting design guidelines. The draft plan includes a range of recommendations and an implementation plan. If the Plan is accepted by the City Council, the design guidelines will likely be the first item that is implemented. Redevelopment of the properties at the northwest and southwest intersection of County Road E and Lexington Avenue is almost certain. This draft master plan will be instrumental in moving forward a community vision on how this and other redevelopment and enhancement can occur in the study area. Notable Findings and Recommendations The guiding principles, findings, and recommendations in the draft plan are based on the information collected at the May 20 community meeting, the steering committee meetings, and the technical information prepared by the consultants (Attachment B). The steering committee attendees at the September 4, 2008, meeting unanimously agreed to send the draft version of the Plan to the City Council work session and Planning Commission. To help guide the review, a list of notable findings and recommendations in the draft plan has been included: The plan has set the stage for consensus on public and private improvements that will help achieve the development potential of both Arden Plaza and the former Holiday Inn site. That is, the committee, affected landowners, staff and consultants have agreed in principle on site plans and revised access design that will allow a moderate amount of redevelopment on the Arden Plaza site with manageable short-term traffic impacts. Longer-term, a scheme is proposed to allow further development on both the Arden Plaza and Holiday Inn sites using a signalized intersection at a new location on County Road E. County Road E is proposed to be redesigned as a landscaped boulevard with a central, landscaped median that will focus the left -turn movements, improve traffic safety, greatly enhance appearances and set the tone for private redevelopment. The redesign of the County Road will also introduce a pair of bicycling lanes, a greatly needed addition. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 1, 2008 I WhdocsllahWHdatalPlanningl Community DevelopmentlB2 Small Area Plan Meetings Dct 12008 PCMeeting1100108 - B2 Small Area Plan - PC Memo.doc Page 2 of 4 ■ Comprehensive set of design guidelines for both private and public improvements will help ensure a high quality of physical improvements ■ The land use plan calls for moving beyond several outmoded developments and using land in ways that are more consistent with the important role that this corridor may play in Arden Hills. ■ Overall, the plan guides the way for the next major step in the evolution of the corridor from "County Road E" to "Lake Johanna Boulevard" and a stronger sense of community center. ■ A detailed copy of the traffic study report is available upon request. Ramsey County has been consulted in the redesign of their road. ■ A preliminary cost estimate for a complete package of traffic, streetscape, pedestrian and bicyclist improvements along the new Lake Johanna Boulevard was prepared and totals $2.0 million. (That includes $0.5 million for a ped -bike bridge over Minnesota Highway 51.) ■ The citizens advisory committee has been closely involved every step of the way and fully supports the draft plan. ■ There were several site plan and staging sketches prepared for the Arden Plaza site that were not included in the plan document but can be made available for the discussion. Although prior meetings have referred to this as the B2 District Small Area Plan, the working title is the "Master Plan for the New Lake Johanna Boulevard." There are not any technical differences between a small area plan and a master plan. Comments and Additional Changes to Attached Draft The City Council reviewed the draft Plan at their September 15, 2008, work session, and a community meeting was held on September 18, 2008. The compiled results from the community meeting are included in Attachment C. Although the City Council cannot formally vote at work session, they did provide guidance and comments for the draft Plan. These comments have not yet been incorporated to the draft Plan, but they include: • Reducing potential building height from six to four stories; • Elaborating on the short and long term implementation strategies; • Soften, replace, and/or better explain the image on 5-6 to look less intense; • The transportation improvements are critical over the long-term; • Work with Shoreview to continue new road name farther east; • Clarify the use of the word "urban." Although the draft Plan looks formal, it is still a draft and changes can still be made. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 1, 2008 I Whdocs]IAIAHdatalPlanningl Community DevelopmentlB2 Small Area Plan MeetingslOct 12008 PCMeeting1100108 - B2 Small Area Plan - PC Memo.doc Page 3 of 4 Remaining Schedule and Next Steps The project is on a relatively strict timeline because the B2 District moratorium will expire on December 5, 2008. It is the City's goal to have the Zoning Code amended to recognize the Plan and necessary design standards before the moratorium expires. The remaining schedule for this project is as follows: ■ October 1, 2008 — Planning Commission review of the Small Area Plan ■ October 7, 2008 — Final Steering Committee to review comments from the City Council, community meeting, and Planning Commission. ■ October 13, 2008 — Official City Council Review and Acceptance of the Plan ■ November 5, 2008 — Planning Commission reviews Design Standards Ordinance Amendments for the B2 Zone ■ November 24, 2008 — City Council reviews Design Standards Ordinance Amendments for the B2 Zone ■ December 59 2008 — B2 District Moratorium Expires Attachments A. Draft of the "Master Plan for the New Lake Johanna Boulevard" (sent to the Planning Commission September 19, 2008, and is available online at www.ci.arden-hills-nm.us/smallareWlan). B. Community Comments from the May 20, 2008, Community Meeting C. Community Comments from the September 18, 2008, Community Meeting City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 1, 2008 I WhdocsllahlAHdatalPlanningl Community Developmental Small Area Plan Meetings IOct 12008 PCMeeting1100108 - B2 Small Area Plan - PC Memo.doc Page 4 of 4 Attachment A Draft of the "Master Plan for the New Lake Johanna Boulevard" (sent to the Planning Commission September 19,2O08, and is available online at www.ci.arden-hills.mn.us/smallareaplan) It EN HILLS October 1, 2008, Planning Commission Meeting Attachment B Community Comments from the May 20, 2008, Community Meeting It EN HILLS October 1, 2008, Planning Commission Meeting Comments from the May 20, 2008, Community Meeting: Weaknesses Scum on pond, brings mosquitoes Doesn't draw strangers to existing businesses Low Patronage by majority(?) of residents Retail trending to downscale/vacancies/transient (6) Ugly Bingo Parlor, bingo traffic (3) Poor mix of businesses, needs grocery store, needs variety, small businesses (8) Existing business are struggling (2) Large existing businesses are unlikely to want to change, or difficult to redevelop compatibly (2) Lack of good restaurants/dining/neighborhood cafe/ethnic/healthy (9) Lack of night time activity Weak potential for residential/mixed use Lack of residential housing to make it feel more like a downtown Rail makes residential uses unattractive Architecture is blah and uninteresting, no public square, lack of diversity (3) Not attractive buildings, blank walls, too much asphalt (3) Setbacks are inconsistent — no real "flow" visually on E2 Somewhat chaotic visually, lacks obvious plan, especially on north side of E (3) Needs more continuity architecturally, non-uniform architecture, needs harmony (4) Arden Plaza needs a new look, better signage, outdated office pods (4) Lack of community gathering spot, central park (2) No gateway entrance identification, bad signage (2) No cultural or art attractions More Green, trees, etc (2) Needs decorative lighting (3) Too many parking lots right on County Road E No Access to Public Transit (3) Area is not bicycle and pedestrian friendly, needs more connectivity through City, especially from west, few sidewalks and bike paths (15) Lack of sidewalk on north side of E (2) No designated bike trail, better bike access through city (5) Poor pedestrian/bike access across 51, bad bridge, too narrow, unsafe (14) Lousy/unsafe access for vehicles, turning onto Lexington is difficult, poor circulation (3) Traffic in and out of Arden Plaza and internal circulation is bad (3) Heavy traffic, too much, especially during rush hour (8) Too many access points, curb -cuts (3) 51 and E is a dangerous intersection (2) B2 Small Area Plan — May 20, 2008 Curve at Pine Tree Drive is dangerous Train that goes every hour on the '/z hour backs up traffic (3) Strengths University students use the district Existing businesses already in place and known, centralized (3) Variety/Mix of businesses, good shopping (10) Serves some consumer needs, serves local needs (2) Nice business district Lower density of businesses Small family businesses, local, neighborhood retail, useful, small town feel, no big box stores, unique (22) Variety of office space and employment opportunities (2) Historically this was the main business area for Arden Hills Arden Plaza, hardware store, pharmacy, post office (7) Convenient banking (2) Source of good tax income for Arden Hills Accessibility via arterial streets and from neighborhoods (3) Retail shops within walking distance of neighborhoods Easy access to neighborhoods, centrally located (4) Ease of access for pedestrians, bikers, and autos, manageable traffic (4) Some pedestrian sidewalks Decent parking Possible light-rail future opportunities Central to other commercial development, large chains on Lexington (2) Good access from Snelling Avenue and I-.694 and Lexington Avenue (9) Traffic flows well except at rush hour, good amount of traffic (2) County Road E can support development, four lanes, turn lanes (3) The area is well defined, has a beginning and end Large area and can accommodate a variety of uses Small town layout, residential feel, quite side streets (3) Area has a pattern of development that can be built upon Most existing development does not directly conflict with obvious future plans Strong community feel and quaintness, friendly, meet neighbors (3) Relatively calm visually Buildings are setback from street, not right on the street Stability Railroad tracks create natural division of land uses Has redevelopment opportunities and open areas Aged in such a way that it is close to turning over Two large parcels on prime corner Little in the area that needs to be preserved Narrow street and bridge Banners on light poles 82 Small Area Plan — May 20, 2008 2 Open green space, landscaping, and mature trees (9) Quality parks nearby, undeveloped areas, and trails (3) Close to beach Need to include environmental concerns and impact in planning future development Wide street has potential for landscaping or boulevard Opportunities Keep all the property on the tax rolls Make retail areas more accessible by pedestrian and bike traffic, from all directions, safe crossings (8) Promote ease of access for pedestrians, bikes, and autos (2) Prominent bike paths, sidewalks or walking paths on both sides of street (5) Circulator bus for area No more than 2-3 curb cuts into business sections, put a frontage road to limit access points, particularly Mr. Movies and TCF (3) Alter Curb cuts to more "street -like" elevation (not up over sidewalks) Better street circulation Four -lane Bridge, with pedestrian walkway and bike lane (8) Better turn lanes or roundabout (3) Add right hand turn lane from northbound Snelling/Hamline to east bound Co Rd. E Two lanes each way on Lex. South of E Right turn lane from eastbound Co Rd. E to southbound Lex. Two left turn lanes from eastbound Co Rd. E to northbound Lex Right turn lane from southbound Lex to westbound Co. Rd. E Circulation road behind Flaherty's and Corp Express so buildings can be closer to E. Lower speed limits Traffic hub with mass transit to major metro access; hub to include retail and service shops to support those utilizing mass transit Plan with Shoreview for a transit hub/depot with structured parking on NE corner of Co Road E and Lexington. Keep traffic down No trucks Limit traffic congestion Extend Connelly Ave across railroad track to connect with Grey Fox Road Parking behind stores (3) Parking structure up against the railroad to preserve the Co. Rd. E frontage On -Street parking (3) Some residential mixed in with retail Encourage and support businesses that citizens want as part of their "neighborhood" (2) Neighborhood businesses on north side of the street Viability of Grand Avenue B2 Small Area Plan — May 20, 2008 3 Retail Office Supply Variety of service stores and retail (3) Nice upper end shops Home improvement retail Anchor store such as Costco (no Walmart) (2) Post Office Small Businesses/restaurants, Unique restaurants, inexpensive, ethnic, Small specialty shops: bakery, coffee, book store, Asian take-out, clothing, gifts, drugstore, toy store, green products store, ice cream, shoe repair, cleaners (7) Small scale neighborhood commercial with a common architectural theme Food: Co-op, farmers market, interesting restaurants, real restaurants, sit-down, neighborhood bar/cafe — but not a chain, more wine selection (6) A Sweet Tomatoes Restaurant Trader Joe's (2) Someplace to have real ice cream cones — not soft serve Keep pharmacy and Ace Hardware No big box retail (3) Replace Bingo Hall with dining or motel or housing Close down bingo hall Farmers market in Arden Plaza parking lot Remove octagon buildings and replace with not "cutsie" small businesses visible from all sides (no Walgreens, CVS, or Bigbox) Holiday in as conference center/community center (3) Holiday Inn converted to senior housing project within current building Mixed use on Holiday Inn site (residential above community/retail/office/services) (2) Mixed-use, including residential (3) Should have a multi -use zone so that residential could be mixed with the retail Consider needs of local corporations; Boston Scientific, Land-o-Lakes, Deluxe, etc. Put library where bingo hall is and have food and gathering place Move City hall to Arden Plaza general area (2) Ramsey County library portal Consider public purpose for Arden Plaza —library? Some kind of community plaza where people can gather —town square Community Park A focus place where people can eat and gather, public meeting areas or room in old holiday inn hotel Community bulletin board Divided roadway with landscaping Wide boulevards for pedestrian walkways, landscaping (8) Multi -use sidewalk north of Co Road E and west of Lexington Avenue and safe crossing areas to cross Lexington Walks and trails should compliment the existing trail system Uniform trees and street lights (2) Pedestrian friendly square, fountain, occasional street vendors (2) B2 Small Area Plan — May 20, 2008 El Good landscaping, pleasant surroundings, outdoor patios, water Signs along Snelling for Northwestern College Improve park and hockey rink size/access Change name of County Road E to ... community choice Continued small town feel, Arden Hills community identity (3) People friendly amenities Low Building profile, no building taller than 3 stories (2) Outdoor art Large setbacks Buildings that architecturally flow together, that do not "age", blend with environemnt (7) Quality architecture, not franchise architecture Gateway signage Work together with Shoreview to improve the corner aesthetically; trees, sidewalk, landscaping, use of retail space Mix of business and landscaping Maintain trees and green spaces (5) Utilize wind mill structures around community Plan for green or LEED design in all housing types B2 Small Area Plan — May 20, 2008 Attachment C Community Comments from the September 18, 2008, Community Meeting lt- ,-:��EN October 1, 2008, Planning Commission Meeting Comments from the September 18, 2008, Community Meeting: Lights timed to 35 mph +. Do not slow beyond the 11" lanes. Left turns allow U-turns. Some residents are young and can drive. Will business owners, etc., on County Road E be made responsible in clearing snow from sidewalks? No enforcement now. More dangerous to walk in winter now. It is known if business people, etc., want to come to and stay in this area of redevelopment — don't want empty buildings in long run. Need sidewalks and biking space on Harriet and Pine Tree Drive. Improve the safety of the curve on Pine Tree Drive. Need to "soften" Harriet and Pine Tree to reduce through traffic. I like all that I'm hearing. I just wish it could happen sooner. I hope the bike bridge can be TOP priority and happen very soon (3-5 years)! Thanks — great plan. A format similar to Arbor Lakes in Maple Grove would be nice. An environment to keep the residents of Arden Hills shopping and spending money in our own community. Also better places for our youth to be employed at, where they currently look for employment in Shoreview, New Brighton and Roseville. Pot -O -Gold space — changed to industrial condos overlooking Snelling. Let's not wait too long to do this. As the residents of Arden Hills age, we need to look at what makes Arden Hills enticing for young people to move here. Loved the ideas in the presentation. The zone will never become highly used by pedestrians no matter what improvements are made. Please keep pedestrian -centric designs from hindering traffic patterns and from costing us tax money. Adding a signal would hinder traffic flow too much!! Arden Plaza users can always use Lexington for an easier exit, none is necessary here on County B2 Small Area Plan — September 18, 2008 Road E. I like the boulevard plan and the emphasis on creating a sense of place. I recognize that developing places for dining, etc., is a private development; however, I would like to see small, unique shops and dining encouraged through the design. Open space ! ! Gathering areas. I would like to see this project move ahead without being impacted by the development of the TCAAP property. Upscale dining would be nice. Thank you for your work. I would really reconsider high density — none that close to railroad tracks. Who would want to live there? Outdoor dining should be more upscale and private! More like Tria in North Oaks (not in front of street). It is obvious that a lot of great thinking and planning has gone into this. If the planning principles and guidelines as stated in the paper and also this evening, it will all be on the right track. Everything is good — community, grocery, a place to gather, announcing the arrival to a special place, etc., is great. One item — think about a local adult daycare facility, where we can leave an elderly person while we come to shop and dine. Have you seen the construction area on Hwy 81 in Robbinsdale by North Memorial? I like it! Your suggested improvements mirror that design. I like the idea of mixed use buildings along the street - for all retail or service businesses at street level with residential or business on second floor. It seems like this would encourage pedestrian activity on the street — more lively, not so barren. Pedestrian traffic across Hwy 51 should be a priority. Seems like the city is on the right path with these ideas and plans. We want to see some upscale senior housing — to move the Arden Hills empty nesters out of their houses to free them up for new families. Any green technology options? 82 Small Area Plan — September 18, 2008 2 One or two mid-size (or small) pedestrian plazas —places to linger, eat and drink, as well as just passing through. Say where Mr. Movies used to be in Arden Plaza. Must do something for safe pedestrian/bicycle access across Hwy 51 bridge — ASAP ! ! After laying down minimum standards for new buildings, specify that for city approval of any particular proposal, in addition to meeting all the minimums, the design must include "something extra," above the minimums (some extra quality/qualities/features/etc.) so we don't wind up with an area that meets the minimums but seldom rises above them. In other words, "good enough" is not good enough for approval. Would like to see as much permeable surfacing as possible, to minimize runoff and associated issues. Recreational locations for residents — those in NDR? What about "being" someplace — a gathering place to arrive to, not just drive by. Outdoor dining? Community places? Stoplights might stop traffic rather than make it smoother. Retail should be up closer to the street for better visibility. County Road E — will county consent? RCWD — what do they have to say? Housing next to train? Property owners in Shoreview — W to open space zoning. Starting with street improvements would help bring private sector redevelopment. Some concerns about additional traffic on Pine Tree and Harriet — with more density on Lake Johanna Blvd. Street lights on Harriet. Crossing at Lexington needs improvements. How will left -turn loss be coordinated with businesses? Traffic flow through N/S and E/W of Arden Plaza and North Park? Pedestrian connection from Harriet to Arden Plaza!! B2 Small Area Plan — September 18, 2008 Improved traffic and pedestrian at Harriet and Lexington — no light now. Street lights on Harriet Avenue — pedestrian scale. B2 Small Area Plan — September 18, 2008 4 Ito.- -,�ARZEN HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: October 1, 2008 PC Agenda Item 59A TO: Planning Commission FROM: Meagan Beekman, City Planner SUBJECT: City Council Planning Case Update The City Council did not review any planning related cases at their August 11, 2008, meeting. At their August 25, 2008, meeting, the City Council reviewed the following planning case. PC# 08-019 — Minor Subdivision, Rezoning, and Lot Consolidation —1330 Indian Oaks Circle The City Council voted unanimously to approve the resolutions authorizing the subdivision, rezoning, and lot consolidation of a 1,011 square foot City -owned parcel and 1330 Indian Oaks Circle. Additionally, the City Council approved the settlement agreement between the property owner and the City. At their August 6, 2008, meeting the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the planning case. The City Council did not review any planning related cases at their September 8, 2008, meeting. The City Council will be reviewing an application to extend the filing deadline for the Final Plat of Lake Johanna Woods for one year at their September 29, 2008, meeting. g The City Council held four TCAAP related work sessions on August 11 th, August 20th, September 8th, and September 17th to discuss the naming of the TCAAPproperty,tour housing developments in other communities, and discuss housing related issues such as type, tenure, and massing. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for October 1, 2008 \\Metro-inet.us\ardenhills\Planning\Planning Commission\CC Reports\100108 - PC report - CC report.doc Page 1 of 1 MINUTES CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 6, 2008 6:30 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER Chair Clayton Larson called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Present were: Chair Clayton Larson, and Commissioners Janet Stodola, Elizabeth Modesette, Roberta Thompson, Andy Holewa, and David Sand (Alternate). Absent were: Commissioners Clayton Zimmerman and Daniel Reiff. Also present were: City Planner I Meagan Beekman and Recording Secretary Bonita Kaska. APPROVAL OF AGENDA — AUGUST 6, 2008 The agenda was accepted as presented. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — JULY 2, 2008, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Commissioner Holewa moved, seconded by Commissioner Sand, to approve the July 2, 2008, Minutes, as presented. The motion carried unanimously (6-0). PLANNING CASES A. PLANNING CASE #08-019; Minor Subdivision, Lot Consolidation, and Rezonin ; 1330 Indian Oaks Circle; City of Arden Hills — Public Hearin City Planner I Meagan Beekman reported that the City of Arden Hills is requesting a minor subdivision and lot consolidation to subdivide a 1,011 square foot portion of a 6.67 acre (72,745 square feet) City -owned parcel and consolidate it with a residential property located at 1330 Indian Oaks Circle. In addition, the City requests that the subdivided portion be rezoned from I-1, Limited Industrial, to R-1, Single Family Residential. She provided background and stated that the Staff recommended approval, subject to the following condition: 1. The City shall file the minor subdivision and consolidation with the Ramsey County recorder. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION — AUGUST 6, 2008 2 Ms. Beekman showed an aerial of the property and pointed out that that the rezoning is the portion that requires a hearing and the bold line is the new property line. She also showed the proposed Certificate of Survey and some photos. Commissioner Holewa inquired why this did not require two motions. Ms. Beekman replied that it was because they are contingent on each other. Commissioner Holewa inquired as to how they would proceed today if something was encroaching on City land. Ms. Beekman replied that it would depend on the property owner. She stated that, in this case, the property owner is willing to cooperate with the City. Commissioner Holewa stated that, in this case, it is a foreclosure. He inquired whether a new buyer would know this is in existence when they bought it. Ms. Beekman replied that the information regarding the legal settlement would not necessarily be attached to the deed of the property, but a new survey would be recorded with the deed and the County and show the new property lines. Commissioner Holewa inquired as to how they would protect the new owner. Chair Larson replied that there is usually a title search and title insurance to protect the new owner. He stated that, if it was private property the encroachment was on, it could be a different situation. Commissioner Holewa inquired whether the new owner would be on the hook for $25,000 if the property owner sold it. Ms. Beekman replied that it was her understanding that that would be made clear through the title insurance. Chair Larson stated that if the legal settlement was not settled them this would be considered a "cloud" on the title. Ms. Beekman stated that the City attempted to negotiate with the original property owner and do civil negotiations. She stated that, at that time, the property changed owners. The City reopened the negotiations, but was not successful. At that point, legal action was taken. After a year, the property went into foreclosure. Commissioner Holewa inquired whether the new buyer knew anything about it when he bought it. Ms. Beekman replied that she did not have that information. Chair Larson opened the Public Hearing at 6:43 p.m. and inquired whether anyone wishing to speak regarding this case. There was no response. Chair Larson closed the Public Hearing 6:44 p.m. Chair Larson and asked the Commission if they had any further discussion or questions. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION — AUGUST 6, 2008 3 Commissioner Modesette stated that there were three parts to the motion. She wondered why the consolidation of the lot, which is usually done by the County, was not a condition, rather than being part of the motion. Ms. Beekman replied that this is an extremely unique situation. In a typical situation, the lot consolidation would take place and the City would need to approve that. In this case, it was a single redrawing of lines. Staff chose to break it down to have three separate aspects. Commissioner Modesette inquired whether, because it was consolidated, it will appear on the tax roles as a separate parcel, which would require some paperwork down at the County. Ms. Beekman stated that was correct. She stated that the City would be filing it. Discussion ensued. Commissioner Sand inquired whether the boundary line is following the existing fence. Ms. Beekman stated that was correct. Commissioner Thompson inquired as to what they have in place now to prevent this situation from happening again. Ms. Beekman replied that there is a process for applying for a pool. The applicant would come in for a Building Permit, would include a survey, along with the application, and would verify that the property lines are based on that survey. Ms Beekman stated that the cost of getting a Certificate of Survey could be high, so they would allow a Site Plan, which is a Non -Certified Survey. If, when the City inspects, the measurements were close, the applicant would then be required to have a Certified Survey done. Commissioner Holewa inquired whether the procedure is different for fences. Ms. Beekman stated that it is, and it is a lot less expensive. She stated that the applicant would submit a sketch, locating where the property lines are, and it would be verified by aerials. She stated that their aerials show the actual property lines. She added that, in addition, an on-site drawing would be required. Commissioner Thompson inquired whether the City has the appropriate resources or staffing to go out to look at properties. Chair Larson replied that, when the lot is platted, the corner pins are installed. He stated that the property owners can usually find the corner pins. Commissioner Thompson inquired whether the City has enough staff. Ms. Beekman replied that that was not something they have identified as a problem. She stated that she does site visits as part of her job. She added that the aerials provided by Ramsey County are an invaluable resource, as far as identifying where the actual property lines are. Commissioner Sand inquired if the remedy was to have the owner remove the pool, would there be an option for a different remedy. Ms. Beekman replied that this situation is unique — there has never been a similar case. The City would be open to other alternatives. Chair Larson stated that there are some cities that have mandatory teardown rules. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION — AUGUST 6, 2008 4 Commissioner Holewa stated that, when you look at the survey, it would have been clear, when the homeowner applied for a permit for the sunroom addition that the pool and fence were encroaching on City property. Ms. Beekman stated that is when it was discovered. Discussion ensued. Chair Larson stated that a Motion would include minor subdivision, lot consolidation and rezoning. Commissioner Holewa moved, seconded by Commissioner Modesette, to recommend approval of Planning Case #08-019; Minor Subdivision, Lot Consolidation, and Rezoning; 1330 Indian Oaks Circle, City of Arden Hills, subject to the conditions of the Planning Commission at their August 6, 2008 meeting. The motion carried unanimously (6-0). UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS Ms. Beekman reported that, regarding the Clear Channel issue, the Court ruled in favor of the City, pending any appeals. REPORTS A. Report from the City Council No City Council Member was present. B. Planning Commission Comments and Requests TCAAP PropertX Ms. Beekman stated that she did not attend the Work Session. She added she was not sure if any final decisions were made, but they did not decide on the name yet. Commissioner Modesette inquired as to whose responsibility it is to decide on the name. Ms. Beekman replied that the City Council would have to work with the developer and approve the name. Commissioner Sand inquired whether there had been a decision made about the 10 and 96 options - specifically alignment. Ms. Beekman replied that the Council did decide that it would keep the current alignment of the road, but there were some variations. Commissioner Sand inquired as to how many manufactured homes were affected. Ms. Beekman replied that it was approximately 12-15. B2 Steering Committee ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION — AUGUST 6, 2008 5 Commissioner Modesette stated that she was unable to attend the last discussion. Commissioner Sand wanted to confirm whether the next Work Session would be August 191 2008, at 6:30 p.m., to talk about streetscape design. Ms. Beekman confirmed that was correct and added that those meetings are open to the public. Commissioner Stodola reported that, on the back of the Agenda, the Commissioners' tenures and appointments are listed. She stated that she would like to thank City Planner James Lehnhoff, or whoever was responsible for doing that. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Sand moved, seconded by Commissioner Thompson, to adjourn the meeting at 7:09 p.m. The motion carried unanimously (6-0).