HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-06-09-PCChair
Clayton Larson
Commissioners
� EN HILLS
1245 W. Highway 96
Arden Hills, MN 55112
Andrew Halewa
Modesette
651.792.7800Liz
Daniel Reiff
Arden Hills
www.ci.arden-hills.mn.us
Janet Stodola
Roberta Thompson
Planning Commission
Clayton Zimmerman
May 6, 2009
City Vision
A strong community that values our unique environment, our fiscal soundness,
and our tradition as a desirable city in which to five, work, and play.
Agenda
Regular Planning Commission Convenes 6:30 PM
Call to Order
1. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
2. MINUTES
A. April 8, 2009, Regular Meeting
3. PLANNING CASES
A. Planning Case 09-008; Variance; 1156 Amble Drive; Elaine Francis and David Yauch —Not a Public
Hearing
B. Planning Case 09-007; Sign Standard Adjustment; Arden Plaza; Wellington Management Company —Not a
Public Hearing
4. UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS
5. REPORTS
A. Report from the City Council
B. Panning Commission Comments
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.uslplanningcases
It',
EN HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: April 8, 2009 PC Agenda Item 3.A
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Meagan Beekman, City Planner
Charles Roberts, Community Development Intern
SUBJECT: Planning Case #09-008
Variance
Elaine Francis and David Yauch
1156 Amble Drive
ATTACHMENTS: A — Application and Supporting Materials
B — Air Photo and Photographs of the Site
Requested Action
The applicant is requesting a variance to construct a second -story decorative dormer over an
attached garage of the dwelling under construction at 1156 Amble Drive. While the new
dwelling is being built in the legally non -conforming footprint of the former, the addition of the
dormer over the garage would Increase the volume of the structure within the front yard setback.
The Zoning Code requires a front yard setback of 40 feet in the R-1 Zoning District and does not
permit nonconforming buildings to increase their encroachment without a variance.
Background
1. Overview of Request
The applicant owns the dwelling at 1156 Amble Drive, which is a located in the R-1 Zoning
District. In early 2008, the existing dwelling, built in 1979, was destroyed in a fire and the
applicant has since obtained the necessary permits from the City to construct a new dwelling
with attached two -stall garage on the existing footprint. The new dwelling will continue to
have legally non -conforming front and lakefront (OHW) setbacks. The west or front side of
the structure encroaches 10.4 feet into the 40 -foot front yard setback while the garage
attached on the south side of the structure encroaches 6.4 feet. The east or rear side of the
City of Arden dills
Planning Commission Meeting for April 8, 2009
1,'Melro-Ines. us I ar denhrlls 1Planning IPlanning Cases 12009109-008 Yauch Variance (pending) W40809 - PC Report - Yauch Varrance.doc
Page 1 of 7
structure encroaches within the 50 -foot setback from the Karth Lake OHW by as much as
20.3 feet at one point.
The new dwelling will include a series of dormers on the second story along the front side of
the structure. The dormers on the dwelling would not increase the volume within the front
yard setback as the former dwelling had similar features. However, to complement the house,
the attached garage would be increased in height and also include a dormer, extending to the
front of the garage itself. The dormer is purely decorative and would not be an occupied
space. While a majority of the garage, including the raised roof, is outside of the setbacks, the
portion within the 6.4 feet front yard encroachment would be noticeably enlarged by the
addition of the dormer. While the City allows legally nonconforming structures to be rebuilt
on the existing footprint with a similar volume, Section 1350.04 states that nonconforming
buildings shall not be enlarged to occupy a greater area or height that augments its
nonconformity. Thus, a variance is required to allow the dormer to be constructed on the
second story of the garage.
When the home was originally constructed in 1979 it met both the front and shoreland
setbacks at the time. The front yard setback appears to have been 30 feet at the time, since
most of the homes in this area are setback similarly. In addition, Karth Lake has increased in
depth dramatically over the years due to the absence of adequate drainage out of the lake. A
water pump has since been installed to stop the encroachment of the lake into the
surrounding properties. The result of this geographic anomaly is that the homes around the
lake have lost between 20 and 30 feet of property, making most of them non -conforming.
Had the lake not risen the applicants home could have simply been rebuilt to meet the front
and shoreland setbacks and the dormer would not have become an issue. Staff has included
an aerial photograph of the property from 1953 that indicates the water level change
(Attachment B)
The applicant has submitted a letter addressing the variance criteria, a survey of the property,
and elevations of the dormer (Attachment A). Also attached is an aerial photo and
photographs of the site (Attachment B).
2. Site Data.
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for April 8, 2009
I '.'Metro-inet.us lardenhiIWPlanningOanning Cases 12fN 999-008 Much Variance (pending)1040809 - PC Report - Yauch Variance.doc
Page 2 of 7
3. Surrounding Area
North Low Density Residential R-1: Single Family Residential Single Family Detached
Residential
South Low Density Residential R-1: Single Family Residential Single Family Detached
Residential
East Low Density Residential R-1: Single Family Residential Single Family Detached
Residential
West I N/A
Plan Evaluation
N/A
1. R-1 Regulations, Existing Conditions, and Proposed Redevelopment
A. Lot Size chi Dimensions
The lot is 29,171 square feet, 95 feet wide and
Just over 305 feet long. The lot meets or
exceeds the size, width and depth requirements
for the R-1 District.
B. Structure Setbacks — Variance Required
From the front property line, the new dwelling
will be 29.6 feet back with the garage an
additional four feet (33.6) behind. Principal
strictures in the R-1 District require a front yard
setback of 40 feet, meaning this property has an
Karth Lake
1. Minimum Lot Area (sf)
1400
2. Minimum Lot Size
(ft, width/depth)
95/130
3. Height (ft.)
35
4. Lot Covered by Structure
25%
5. Min. Landscape Lot Area
65%
6. Minimum Building Setbacks
encroachment of 10.4 feet for the house and 6.4 feet for the garage. While the home is
allowed to be reconstructed in the same footprint and of similar volume, any
enlargements or expansions to the portion of the house or garage within the front yard
setback require a variance. Although the new dwelling will include a covered porch that
encroaches an additional 5.6 feet into the front yard, it meets the requirements for
covered parches in Section 1325.03, Subd. 2.D of the Zoning Code.
As the property is on Karth Lake, there is a required 50 feet setback from the Ordinary
High Water Mark (OHW). Although the original house was in compliance when built in
1979, the water level of Karth Lake has risen significantly, causing the structure to
become nonconforming. As the OWH line varies through the lot, the level of
encroachment varies, though at its closest point, the dwelling is 29.7 feet from the OWH,
representing an encroachment of 20.3 feet. The attached garage is in compliance with the
OWH setback.
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for April 8, 2009
IIMetro-inet.uslar-denhillslPlanninglPlanning Casesl2009W9-008 Yauch Variance (pending)W40809 - PC Report- Yauch Variance.doc
Page 3 of 7
The dwelling and attached garage meet the side yard setbacks for the R -I District.
C. Lot Coverage — Meets Requirements
A majority of the lot is occupied by Karth Lake, leaving only 10,387 square feet (35.6%)
of the property above the OHW. Despite this, the new dwelling would not exceed the R-1
District coverage limitations for structure or minimum landscaped area. Adding the
dormer will not impact impervious surface coverage of the lot.
D. Structure Height — Meets Requirements
The new dwelling meets the 35 foot height limit for the R-1 District.
Z. Flood Plain, Wetlands, and Easements
The proposed addition is outside of any flood plains, wetlands, or easements.
3. Additional Review
The applicants have been approved for the building permits from the City to proceed with
building, excluding the garage dormer. As a lakefront property, the applicant is required to
receive approval from the Rice Creek Watershed District and DNR.
Variance Evaluation Criteria
The criteria listed below must be used to evaluate each of the variance requests.
A. Variance Review Criteria — Section 1355.04 Subd. 4.C:
Variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code may be granted in instances
where the strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances
unique to the individual property under consideration. Variances shall only be granted
when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of
the Code. "Undue hardship," as used in connection with the granting of a variance,
means:
■ The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use under conditions
permitted by the Zoning Code;
■ The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property
not created by the landowner;
■ The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality;
and,
City of Arden Dills
Planning Commission Meeting fog- April 8, 2009
I Wetro-inet.uslardenhillslPlanniyTglPlannin Casesl2009W9-008 Yauch Variance (pending) W40809 - PC Report - Yauch Variance.doc
Page 4 of 7
Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if
reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Code.
Findings of Fact
Staff offers the following fifteen findings of fact for review:
General Findings
1. The lot size meets the requirements of the R-1 Zoning District.
2. The lot meets the width and depth requirements for the R-1 Zoning District.
3. The new dwelling does not meet all property line setbacks. The dwelling and garage will
encroach 10.4 and 6.4 feet into the front yard setback respectively. Portions of the
dwelling will also encroach on the 50 -foot OHW setback from Karth Lake.
4. The dwelling and garage meets all side yard setbacks for the R-1 Zoning District.
5. The structure coverage meets the requirements of the R-1 Zoning District.
6. The minimum landscape area meets the requirements of the R-1 Zoning District.
7. The new dwelling will not exceed the 35 foot height limit.
8. Dormers are permitted features within the R-1 Zoning District.
9. The existing dwelling is outside of the 100 -year flood plain, wetlands, and easements.
10. The applicant has been issued all the necessary building permits by the City to construct
the dwelling with the exception of the garage dormer.
Variance Findings:
11. The garage and dormer are reasonable uses within the R-1 Zoning District.
12. It is not clear as to whether to property is unique or not. Many residential lots
surrounding Karth Lake are in legal nonconformance with the front yard setback while
the increased water level has made a number of properties in nonconformance with the
%WH setback. On the other hand, the fact that the water level has risen so dramatically
on this lake is itself a unique situation that made the property non -conforming.
13. The circumstances of the property were not created by the landowner.
14. It is unlikely the dormer would have a negative impact on the property or the
neighborhood: The presence of the dormer adds to the aesthetic appeal of the home and
may have a positive impact on the property and surrounding community.
15. The installation of the dormer is not based on economic considerations alone, since the
cost to install the dormer is greater than if the dormer were not installed at all.
Staff Analysis
The findings of fact for this variance request do not specifically support a recommendation for
denial or approval. The proposal appears to meet most of the variance review criteria. As is
often the case, however, the evaluation criterion that states "The plight of the landowner is due to
circumstances unique to the property...," is the difficult evaluation criterion. The property itself
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for April 8, 2009
I Wetr o-inet.uslardenhillsOanningOantTing Cases 12009W9-008 Yauch Variance (pending)W40809 - PC Report - Yauch Variance.doc
Page 5of7
is not unique; however, the rising of Karth Lake has made it nearly impossible to situate the
garage any differently, while requiring the dormer to be pushed back to avoid encroaching in the
front yard setback would make it infeasible to construct, presenting a potentially unique
situation. On the other hand, a number of homes in the Karth Lake neighborhood have been
constructed with a 30 foot front yard setback, placing much of the neighborhood in
noncompliance with the current front yard setback. The water level of Karth Lake, now
maintained by a City lift station, has caused an eventual eroding of rear yards for many
properties along the lake. Before making a motion for approval or denial, this specific variance
evaluation criterion must be addressed for the official record.
Despite this, the variance request itself does not appear to be unreasonable or detrimental. The
dormer will likely not have a negative impact on the neighborhood or the City. Having dormers
on a garage is acceptable within the R-1 Zoning District and would likely not alter the essential
character of the City. The dormer does not create any incompatible land uses and is not being
proposed for economic reasons.
If the Planning Commission recommends approval of the variance, Staff recommends the
following five conditions:
1. The project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted as amended by
the conditions of approval. Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by
the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission.
2. The applicant shall use best management practices (BMPs) to control erosion at all
times during construction.
3. The structure shall conform to all other regulations in the City Code.
4. The dormer shall match the architectural styling of the rest of the primary structure.
options
The findings in this report are not specific enough to fully support approval or denial of the
variance. With a motion to approve or deny the variance, the italicized criteria must be
addressed for the record:
1. The proposed addition is/is not a reasonable use in the R-1 Zone because ...
2. The proposed addition will/will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood or
the City because...
3. The circumstances in this planning case are/are not unique to the property because...
4. The variance is/is not based on economic considerations alone because ...
Criteria 1, 2, and 4 are already addressed in the findings. Criteria three must be addressed prior
to making a motion.
1. Recommend Approval with Conditions: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case
09-008 for a variance at 1156 Amble Drive with conditions based on the findings of fact, the
submitted plans, as proposed in the April 8, 2009, planning case report.
City ofArden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for April 8, 2009
i Metro-' et.uslatdeiihillslPlanninglPlanning Cases 12009'M-008 Yauch Variance (pendingfi040809 -PC Report - Yauch Variance.doc
Page 6 of 7
2. Recommend Approval as Submitted. Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 09-
008 for a variance at 1156 Amble Drive based on the findings of fact, the submitted plans, as
proposed in the April 8, 2009, planning case report.
3. Recommend Denial: Motion to recommend denial of Planning Case 09-008 for a variance at
1156 Amble Drive based on the following findings...
4. Table: Motion to table Planning Case 09-008 for a variance at 1156 Amble Drive: a specific
reason and/or information request should be included with a motion to table.
Public Hearin
Although a public hearing is not required for a variance, the Commission can allow public
comments.
Notice
Although a variance does not require a public hearing, a public meeting notice was prepared by
the City and mailed to properties within three -hundred fifty (350) feet of the subject property.
Resident Comment
The City has received comments from one neighbor who lives directly across the street from the
subject property and who spoke strongly in favor of the proposal.
Deadline for Agency Actions
The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on March 16, 2009.
Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, the City must act on this request by May 15, 2009 (60 days),
unless the City provides the petitioner with written reasons for an additional 60 day review
period. The City may with the petitioners' consent extend the review period beyond the 120
days.
A ttac-h mPnte
A Application and Supporting Materials
B Air Photo and Photographs of the Site
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for April 8, 2009
IIMetro-inet.usIai-denhillsIPlanningIPlantzing Cases 12009109-008 Yauch Variance (pending)W40809 - PC Report- Yauch Variance.doc
Page 7 of 7
Attachment A
Application and
Supporting Materials
'It
,AWEN HILLS
May 6, 2009, Planning Commission Meeting
Its.-
,,--ARVEN 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.
Submittal Date
Application Completed Date
Accepted by
Receipt Number
Council Decision
Council Decision Date
2008 LAND USE APPLICATION
0
Applicant Information
4
Address: ����. :y ,%�'.
�'
te
Telephone No.: Other: � � --� . i � a� U
�
rom F a x N o .
m Email Address:
P
Property Information
Propert Owner: Iv,
ya- C
Owner Address: -'°°a%.,. /V
Owner
�. Owner Telephone No. Other: �--— t
t
Address of Property Involved: /! 6 /n
Legal Description: v f3 /6
Property ID No.: 7..- —
Type T e of Use:
m
Zone:mm�- Property Acreage:17l
.vmvviiiiiiiommimiiiiimvirommmimimiumumrvrmrnNmmmnuiiimimrviimroinmvHnaviiiioimriiimiiiovsiiimi�immmmiiiiHnroniiiniiiN,iiiiimimiwm9iimimi"vWnniiid.�wnonevmviiiFowmuanNroiiamvaroummnuneiiiinrommnHrmvriiironNmmmwmvinimmmiiiwavnim/jmmviimcwnunmiHiiiiniiromimmriiiioiiiiNi a A
m/d/m,�mm /! /� mmwiiisiiimniiuiiiansvmipiiiHunmumimmmimmmin
Type of Request*
Apportionment of Assessments ($30)
Comprehensive Plan Amendment ($450)
Conditional Use Permit or Amendment ($350)
Final Plat ($200+ $25 per lot)
Ll Rezoning ($450)
Ll Site Plan Review (Sign or Fence) ($250)
Ll Vacation of Easement or Right -of -Way ($300)
Master Planned Unit Development ($600+escrow)
Final Planned Unit Development ($200)
Planned Unit Development Amendment ($350)
Zoning Code Amendment ($450)
Land Use Requests — Not Already Specified ($150)
Appeal of Administrative Decision ($75)
Minor Subdivision (lot split/consolidation) ($325+escrow)
Preliminary Plat ($400 + $25 per lot + escrow)
Variance (Zoning Code) ($325)
Site Plan Review ($400)
Revised: 12-12-07
Pagel 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):
0 ate.® C- L-7)
r te. w A < tvg ► �.-t. �,
C, z5e, fe Oe e,
A V cc, (lo t4,r-- Fe-lse-
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 "completes 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 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
I Aqenda Deadline and Meeting 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)
Acknowledgement and Signature
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 r6sponsible for all co s incu ed by the City related to the processing of
this application.
AA -P A
Property Owner Signature (Required) Datrp
d'
Ap'ca 6f 9i6nat6re- (If differed than the property owner) D
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 -11www.ci.arden-hi1ls.mn.us
Revised: 12-12-07
Page 3 of 3
TENTATIVE
TENTATIVE
PLANNING
CITY COUNCIL
COMMISSION
MEETING
APPLICATION
MEETING*
DATE*
DEADLINE
(Generally held on the
(Generally held on the
DATE*
first Wednesday at 6:30 p.m.)
last Monday at 7:00 p.m.)
PWA
100
January 7
February 6
February 25
A 03
A 31
`0 1 We =6r
Is
�rri
mwm IN
March 3
April 2
April 28
June 4
June 23
May 5
July 7
August- 6-
August 25
September 8
October 1
October 27
November 5
December 3
December 22
December 1
January -7 (2009)
January 26 (2009)
Acknowledgement and Signature
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 r6sponsible for all co s incu ed by the City related to the processing of
this application.
AA -P A
Property Owner Signature (Required) Datrp
d'
Ap'ca 6f 9i6nat6re- (If differed than the property owner) D
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 -11www.ci.arden-hi1ls.mn.us
Revised: 12-12-07
Page 3 of 3
ZAWADSKI HOMES, INC
4614 CHURCHILL STREET
SHOREVIEW, MN 55126
March 10, 2009
Re: Yauch Variance Request
1156 Amble Drive, Arden Hills
To: City Staff, Planning Commission, City Council
On behalf of our clients, Elaine Francis and David Yauch, Zawadski Homes
submits a variance request application for a false dormer on the garage. The dormer, in
size, is 7'-9" wide x 7'-9" tall (see front elevation drawing). The zenith of the dormer is
approximately 8' in length extending toward the street (see left elevation drawing).
Background
In 2008, the Yauch residence experienced an electrical fire that substantially
damaged the home. After an extended period of insurance claim work, it was determined
that the upper wood structure was damaged beyond what made sense to repair. The
foundation was saved, and the structure above is being replaced. The shell of the new
home will be complete February/March, 2009.
With total wood structure replacement, the Yauchs have benefited from the ability
to modernize the exterior architectural design. The new home design is by Ben Nelson,
with drawings provided by D.F.P. Planning & Design, LLC., which offices out of Blaine.
Zawadski Homes has contracted its architectural work from this firm for many years.
After several plan meetings and design review with Arden Hills staff, all issues
were resolved, allowing the new house design to proceed on the old block foundation.
Late in the permitting process, however, it was determined that setbacks at the garage
area create a situation where the garage dormer added volume to the roof (previous home
did not have a garage dormer). The applicant elected to remove the dormer from the
permit plan and proceed with construction, as the Yauchs have already been dislocated
from their home for a seriously long period.
Variance Request
1. Aesthetics. First and foremost, architectural design is a serious component of
every project. As a builder, Zawadski Homes does not alter the look of a
client's home without consulting the designer and the homeowner. Much like
the City of Arden Hills pays an architect to design their buildings, our projects
are contractual, and the client has contracted for an aesthetic which enhances
the character and value of the home. Simply put, the garage dormer is an
integral part of the overall design, provides asymmetrical balance, and the
designer and owner request that the design remain intact and not be
compromised.
2. The house will function properly without the false dormer, and therefore, we
are not submitting that the house cannot be put to a reasonable use (without
the false dormer). However, we are not proposing an addition that extends out
(on terra firma) toward a neighbors' setback, but rather, the dormer is a visual
feature 13 feet in the air above the driveway facing the street. We are
asserting that the dormer is not an `unreasonable use', and it is an
improvement to the structure, the neighborhood and the City.
3. The smaller lot size of the Yauch' lot, accompanied by the subsequently
created setbacks, creates limits unique to this property, the street, and the
neighborhood, and these limitations were not created by the landowner.
4. The dormer is a modest variance, has no apparent negative impacts and is
within the spirit of what the variance ordinance is designed to allow after
thoughtful review.
5. The dormer is clearly a permitted feature in a residential zone.
6. This variance enhances the essential character of the house, neighborhood and
City.
7. This variance request is primarily aesthetic in nature, and not for economic
reasons.
8. Dormers are permitted features.
Based on the reasons stated, the applicant requests that the City of Arden Hills
give consideration to our request for a variance.
Sincerely,
Jay Johnson
Zawadski Homes
CC: Elaine Francis and David Yauch
J,
__j
1111111111,
8" TRIM
CID
121 12 ,
,0
I
2X12 HAR121 FRIEZE 1312. (TYP.)
411
10" TRIM "--PBL 2" TRIM & 3" TRIM
co
EAR ELEVAT 10
SCALE: 1/8" = I'-011
HARP I PANEL
(TYP.) '.00,
10"&2" TRIM
co
Naomi
MINIM
KICKOUT FLA5H1N6 TO BE INSTALLED A5 NEEDED
EXTERIOR WALL FINISHER TO VERIFY . KICKOUT FR(
FLA5HIN6 15 IN5TALLEE? PRIOR TO FIN15HIN6 SCALE: I
CARPENTER TO FLASH ALL EXTERIOR WINDOWS ANP 120OR5
PER TO MN. & 113C COPE REQUIREMENTS
K
I RAIL
IAN 4
L-/,%I%j 1. VVvr%
LEFT ELEVATION
5CALE, 1/8" = 11-0ll
0 F-1 'Y c
ROOF VENTS
AS REQ'V (TYP.)
REAR E
5CALE: 1/8" = I'-011
ti
LLL
d
L
ti
►�
o o
�o a� m
E--4oa N0"
wcr-
�� II t� NOS
c�n 11 W
OC.rn—
Q N 11 ct Z ±-, L� Q LO
t'
W
J
C)o �Q�npOL-Li
v Co L'i W Cl- m
to cn
llmm _LuNb"
� pet��O
Q-
�o Q�»r� ;�
CL
co (n vn
�L-lj ti
l[ mW
cnO
oQ �a�a�a
J cp
wWwW W L -Li L-li
00000 o p
/
rn� /
/
\ G�' O. iT mac' \ O.
\ o, /
oQOR Qrn �� o
r�x
r�
1 0
�
�. �� 00
Q�gc \ o
/ 9%0,0,60
,41
S/ oa
O
/�� Q� � �
� ......................•--•- �
\ 6
opo
\ . o C>0
W °
CD
Y"
11
\o 0
�� �6�� ���0 n 1�9� x \
/ rnCD p / Cp v v? °g O
`
y
711
�, o
AP
o
v
0
c
c
M
c
O
C)
Q
LL'
V)
V)
til!!
Q
'��9. GO\ y� C�
/ to co006' �-/ �� s � \ �
W
J
=
�
v Co L'i W Cl- m
to cn
llmm _LuNb"
co (n vn
�L-lj ti
l[ mW
00000 O O
J cp
wWwW W L -Li L-li
00000 o p
/
rn� /
/
\ G�' O. iT mac' \ O.
\ o, /
oQOR Qrn �� o
r�x
r�
1 0
�
�. �� 00
Q�gc \ o
,41
Q��1o� �� �0`�y
q �,�,�\�
O
/�� Q� � �
� ......................•--•- �
\ 6
opo
\ . o C>0
W °
to r`
11
\o 0
�� �6�� ���0 n 1�9� x \
GP
o
AP
o
°:' � X ....................\.� .
OD�
CD 10"
Mr
\ p
V) X38 p�F F m(51
t\�
Zk
o o
� �6,•'� � OC O 1,�
00
i
vo
rn
N
\Z
o �
VIAo
QD
\
;
\
/
O
,
1 1, iCD
W
C
CQi +;
W D
O
Q GLI
CF U,
o
,
LL.
j
p
�l
U
� O Z � (")
�i a
QCOD Z W� O j�
o
�
Co u-) cn O
Lbsz z z
t cv �
,
OtL W (}
O O Un tr>
m Z
0 0 0
=
�
v Co L'i W Cl- m
to cn
llmm _LuNb"
co (n vn
�L-lj ti
l[ mW
00000 O O
_ Q QV
wWwW W L -Li L-li
00000 o p
El 00 r
tnN
I
r�x
r�
O)
o
W °
r
�-1
w_7j
Q �
Cc o
W O
O U o
= o
0 0
-C
C'7
.i
o -Q
Co v
y O
0 a�
U} (\D
C
in L o
pr Le)
-O"-t_/ 4
V
OC) E 0>Zi
C) LCL
0
OE �;°0-4
: a. •o
W
E
O u
Co v
W .J.
th
c
0
LJ
C L Q) O
CT J
O �
Q) (b
O
O v Ch
Q�
C O
O l v
LL
L
m O Q a
(b
® o f
Q
C) o
b
C) O O .
0O
f( U)
Attachment B
Air Photo and Photographs of the Site
'it
-AV
EN HILLS
May 6, 2009, Planning Commission Meeting
'..:. %t l l ,• 4?',' { ! �-•� ti'` `•~'�ti }! f' `.tt ! o: ! ''-.. ^+
�t1Y _ Rx.: ,;* J .ry � Y` �•1•. � .z�� ` � f ' f / �,
~'''4� A}:':,'!":- _ j 'r7•, y��. •� '�..,f ti, J a• 1 "\ � i �\ <`-` �•?.,,
t Ct. j a.�.' t J >�` r r j. �7, i>�<, •4- „t t l j '�- j-.�. _ � f .1
"`l" '' 111 -:. �' ' ✓: �. Y ''� K. j' }�, ... '`^ r k-+'.,: JJ -r• --r ''�• _. '` >.4 �''•._ ^-1\ ! _
t .\, }7'../ ^` �< ,: 1 t✓✓ _•+''-J- ~"'1 is � ' .4S^'n •. --�' -^ �-�J�-`-J - J t'Sf,�": .`•`'� t> 4j-' ~` - , y
' n fir' :...C' :+ .r; i.,t•. .a :ra:: :1�: J '- 'e, xi'c�� ..•T. t"' d � i t '\, af:; :»• �y
d < , '�•., .z!. • I -✓ >'j 1. � s ., .t; xt• i ,f ^v 4 ,'•2. j i:. _ - >o: -:�<`'
i. - �'>� -tt •ii.''� ^! � � J• S 4R '$t> T.8' J a ',,?; Y'. �: ,t .4< f '::fr`- ^`' ,.y.. �,:- •cJ':' CSS
t �� r ,: y ✓ ti ,Jv � h- s � kC F '�' r`a: �•.: '"S� !,. ... n '.. �. __ \• d
t '� .:3' - 1 J h. ; � - � �� ; Y'ei y .-:- .'' :: <rw'_ , r..: ': 'kfi`' ..� "�--`,S)•" _ f' .:�^. v) „`,,,.: ,.?5„ . I ,:. "�_. •�" �-•+
E -•\. ,' 1 s �:'`i� > .r. f-, :y. r .:�G 'Y'' by f'' if,. `;4 >me,,, 4... �: ; - o: -`'•\ -.•� • .-L
(t w
---....+-�'",�i � 'n; A. -,.L ---_.5,,.,;;-t 3{:L. _-.s•� �' -r- <F.�-,.t.�_>...-- '"2k >3. 2 .i E J�,� E SC �n � ". tt o,,,,
j '` •-•�'-_"�-r ( A,.':., !A ,'...r \, �::, J^'G' .r' '_ t rt ~> ">. i ��.�: ) t 1 �•t�S .t t __ �v ,
- f
_. v' i -1�T-� L c.-%'� '__'•••}.^.�.^_,.-•'- i � �`3 ..;,,� t ,°y - r. >r>� '. t 't��f .2 .�rtS3 t•-,.- _t- c1': L i` .
p _ t
�4n ✓ � r 7r: � fi• „r 3 � .t>• ;� �•CJZ :,i > '� � �>3}:£ r� >•� �i>",-�' k � l � O
i,� .r' 3 , ',. �•. � 'Ct •f, .,x t31..w _„r e \{t I. , � �7 s r � ; � i r"_`-" sj
� : •f >�'�• -!- ., i '_..: _' VS[ fr ; r i 5.:.: �- v�Gf L ^rfi (� � . < r "1^-a.-•.... t ��;� � :� [ t� s'.�: 3 y> ..� U
tz: t'• ;`. ti ' xf ,: ,� :t« -!,r .'�' { , ':- ti tr <%{;>- ; a f t !�"3>v 1� > + ,(4y�'
'.f:o < ✓- , - Y r• # tG"'. � :'<? `":. r i xXa h .it S -a
} �.r - it �• e %LG� ✓ � i 'T-" �C ..y, ;yt-�"�3�:� � 'y%,.. t *�, s � s � z.L.i ,� 4..{
L
� Ep } _ i Orf cU�� ) ✓�L - :� E N`4F� Y L ,��� a�s ! r'tt` .r- ••2� \.J
�; _ , �,: .: y` � ) - : f G•. € ra. :raj � C' ! � -.� , K Q'
}} ✓ ( Com'` y �l tc i.(w ,C t"V
t st t f � >,�"\' 'x, t - C•y, \4 JY >fJ Y •: S p S-�.>S' t" �.,'2, �'Y /+ N
i �: i t € ° � `� ��4L`.�:..> i ��;,(�: 1, '• - [ 'SR'tL} ksJ"�
.E t ..,✓;,. Gr.. °4 f:h �-.2:. +.i,�,.f, C/s Q"�t
r�r•. jf
l�.J'
i [
j
1 ^
t'•i
:
W-
Lv
i' C
�V
f ,. r2 .: .::. : � � . a•� � ;. ..... e••:.-. ._ S [ � i S JJ •' € .y2 �J
,
y
• y
.-_...................... ... ... _.._._._ SS.: � .2 ;'2 ° � .^.;1:.,...., ....--_. ...... ; :�: 4y '•,-- '':+. fir" � `3_..
� t
t
•1
C' C
✓
CCS
_ O
t
i
t
r.
- U
>f,
\ a>
r
E
[
J C
v
-4
j
iY
t - _
ya �
...... ..:. �:....:.... a �. .... � ., :>
.-..-...-.
,,:ix=a:
.< r
s CB
U _
t ^
ru r
..... .. tCE ....: �.. 1 ... -. :::::. r . ........... :.:: fw:. w::::::::::: ?;: •::.i�3?S:•y-n:•: i:.i>::6: i::"=:�i: iii:: f
............. .... .::.:..: ...... ........ .�. ,..<�>'': �'. .. .. p:?,-.-::::::. .tiiaii•2;:iii i:�ii:2yi;.;r-? in:;:;:
1
a.:e
t. .
C _
O
r':
J
�a
:A.
''
_
...---..::.:. ::. .vim -. • :. 'irii:� ..'..?'' --J---_-. ' ..
i4-
.: .......-.� ;v?i jib -i::-:
•>:?'::iiia-i:}k;'>:3-:'):jY::'.
.-.-.--is->:: i:4v'
•. ss
t
F
L:.....-.- .
r- '
-:;`%!�:•ii:�::,-it>:•>x:f:i;=:t-:'•:ii:;- .�
}•i::l�.:;o:-:o:-:.:;•isi:•irt4i::�:•i::::-:::.•?i:-:-moi
t
t-
'� ...4 , \ .v:::::::::: w:::::::: r.:•::::::::::v::::::::::::riiii:-`?•::ii::{:i -:�'si::Sr'i:;i::::'v'`::r ct
:{kl(::
_ ,L>
i
O
-
i
T
......................
� _ N
^Y t
,t
-t•
;e
�^ �-4.��`;>;?:ism->:`ki�':%:t�"�"`�:;;:i•
..................
t U
f
E
_ U
i
t ce: -:
....::::?•iii; ?-
r- t -
t C
C CCS
n.
I i
2-
i 4 l :�:•F:::k?kaiiii:=
S t v- f
N'
! a
i { �
J -
A: l
vfv
,
J'r
�z
<
a 4
• L.
:
:>:<:>::=»:•.>:... .::::'fit-�_ :::
.-„..iii:?.k:.:;
c A
::............... :.::..;
z CC3
�:=
C 4
l
.................
� f
ca
V
w� kiS::i::i:->::i'•;iiik-viii i.-Siiia ii :v-:-
•. :;:. ::- •;-ii:•is?i<.:?;:i•:?:^;i-`:i>:a?'?:=:=:
_m L
t 14
A>.
1 ”
..........-
� r
r
0
- U
r'
"a
,
tiU
t -
C
a'
✓`f
1
...........-
. rr s
h
SS / :�'-is?•i::?-:-:;-iiiciiii'
t ♦ :wr r.�i ..:}
........:.
:: • � i '...::. .. f.:. J , ....::.:::.v::. iii:
W.
ti............ ............................... .
t r�
vA:• 4
✓�t
r>i:+::f8ii• r'""i'%%ai..i:-iii:.i':
{ [ . ;: fr.:..'9'i:: ;<t•>. .8.: ' cam• Vi
2
i
!' r
J
Gt
f
r.A•.
t
0
t
:4 :•.
....................................
t :::::......... ..[� �,.,,,,yr .......:... ::. •.iii>i>iii;iii>i:???-ii;:?.i;:-i:-ii:-;'.i'
t i
:>:r i:•Y•i>3:: _S
E t
-.4G;•.
C •A
n-1
............... :.
-
.� .. .. :::::::..-. ........ .ter:: ::..::::..::. ...-...:.:.:..
_ S -
_ t _
-i
- U
_ ^O
c
U
a
r.
3:
V
f
_CL> _
E it
t -
r _
i r €
i
CCS
{
-./iii:-is?;?-i:;:?-iiii�?iii:=iii:=i:=iii::i`=ii>.`?•i:
t -t
J
r
7! ilCCS
i
..............
......:.. .. ..... .....:.:�::: ::• •iii:t::::ii:??-iki::;�';•a.?`�, ..
._:�:oRaiiiiii::k'fikt:- ;•-i:•:-:4v??.ii:;- s...
.. :: :' -- =>:`.!+r:::i:<�!'i::!:i>iiiii'���:zfi>:�>:'-ii::ki::aii:::i•:?: �.>i.;, ...... •iii:•ii:?:::: r.. f
1 _
r
f
G
-::-:�:i;., ..::::.-:::::::✓$:�iiiiiii?ir.•. 'iiiriii5>:•;:.>iv:: -::. -�•,�S
,.S
c' - E
..a
n O
.-........
1 '-
. , :. ti .. Ac ^% ::o:-i:::::::.t?r-.:?•i ,::-•::,::::::::: ,::?:-i: •is•:.:;:::::•io:•::•: ......., �"'' ♦�
�' • :�4-::-ii•-::-'-is-Y.i•' . :C:� ''S T
:i:�'ti
Rx
l CCS
4 :d:
..... "i:-A•-4•-:..�:.:'i ii.'::;:v::3.. ...........: . ................. :.....:.: ,, : ,.-i:. 'ti .-.i.::.-. ). }�.• .c t
iiH:i'-ii:-kki:-:?-r i. �''i,
>
Y4
ar
_ )k -
S
'r
v».v
- O
f
'•"rri
�C
1
ti
`o-
ti Sf Y
t
h.
.ii:•iii:•i:•i:!-is?•>' --:::.;'.>• i?. .:.
t
U
>.U
J.+ l ------ ----- - - - - - - - - - - - - - ....
.V
vJ.
45.
'h
2
y
't
F
U
>:r f
•
444( i a!` � "'7 i- ---- --{ � ,G.:�.%•i. € € t U
-'_ r4- Got' � € E •� �
Ef^S�+-y`y"J,.�L._ ..s----• -�" _" ,_S' � �t �n,. +•> �.a 7- --t ._____..- .. -� ?"...-"___• : .✓ € �'L i"•'
? t f't Qi
2� t-+
'''f ? T•-^'•:"_'- , ::C, t t �' E rte..
—77=S
S ✓ 1
f S
_ z _
Y---- c w
..G
s
f.
:f.
t- <
i�
i
i t
>S tf.'v4"c E \- o S) J' Q 2q:, j ? .... ..'.i: i -_t� - 2 ---•. t C-"
''�� orf �� t � - t � > :,r .. { � ° . >_>d E .. ` • E � '� .•�
_ [ -<•, � _ - -"_'-"-_--..� is t r„k
E ✓ tf kr'.
cz
Y: -i
t �,��cr-1
r
�) .✓ <---5•-`.•.i•.,.1_„ i t r ..4• •Q.,S r- f:4 ...,. _ : t_,,,_�-.,......,e 'F y,.. ''_ i�G x - � w1
.N
, 4Y ,.iii... €'• 7 >- : , _'�. ....t t k .4 `: C ' � ��p�> t•°i'
_-
_
i
fpr r_t-0.
„Kt
\gg
EN HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: May 6, 2009 PCAgenda Item 3eB
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Meagan Beekman, City Planner
SUBJECT: Planning Case #09-007
3585 Lexington Avenue North
Arden Plaza
Site Plan Review — Sign Standard Adjustment
ATTACHMENTS: A - Application and Supporting Materials
B - Air Photo and Photographs
Requested Action
The applicant has requested a site plan review for a sign standard adjustment that would allow
for a deviation from the sign code for the location of permitted portable signs.
Background
1. Overview of Request:
The applicant is proposing to designate an area located within 15 feet of their driveway
entrance along County Road E as an acceptable location for the placement of permitted
portable signs. This designated area would be shared amongst the businesses of Arden Plaza,
and would be used for advertising. The sign standard adjustment would allow for a single
permitted portable sign to be placed within this designated area at a time.
The signs would be standard static signs, would not exceed six square feet, and would not be
lit. Presently Arden Plaza has two monument signs that advertise the businesses in the
building. One is located adjacent to the entrance along Lexington Avenue, and the other is
located on the corner of County Road E and Lexington. Advertising on these signs is shared
amongst the tenants of Arden Plaza and allocated by Wellington Management Company.
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for May 6, 2009
II,,44etro-inet.uslar-denhills lPlanning 0anninc, Casesl2009W9-(x07 Arden Plaza Site Plan Rerieiv Signage (pendingo') 50609 -PC Report -Arden
Plaza Sign - Site Plan Review.doc Page 1 of 6
Businesses in the building have had an ongoing issue with getting visibility from County
Road E particularly from drivers heading east. There is no monument sign located here. As
a result Staff has heard concerns from tenants about the ability to be seen by potential
customers due to the topography of the site, the location of the office buildings, and the
hidden nature of their businesses from County Road E. While a permanent solution for the
visibility, and ultimate viability, of the businesses in Arden Plaza is needed, the applicants
and tenants are proposing this as a temporary solution until the redevelopment of the site
takes place. At that time a permanent solution can be found and the sign standard adjustment
would no longer be needed.
According to the Sign Code, businesses may place two portable A -frame, T -frame, sandwich,
or other similar signs that do not exceed six square feet, and are not illuminated within fifteen
feet of their primary entrance during regular business hours. These signs do not require a
sign permit. Staff has interpreted the definition of "primary entrance" to mean a businesses'
primary door, and that interpretation has not changed. This sign standard adjustment would
allow for the placement of one of these signs within fifteen feet of Arden Plaza's primary
driveway along County Road E, rather than within fifteen feet of the doorways. Only one of
these signs would be permitted at a time in this location. Approval of the sign standard
adjustment would not impact the regulations regarding temporary signs or any other signage
that requires a permit.
The applicant has submitted a letter explaining the request and a site plan of the existing
property identifying the requested designated area. (Attachment A).
2. Surrounding Area:
............ .......
�'� re Land IT�e 1'lan.zanin� � �t1. �; I��tnd Use
North
Commercial
B-2: General Business
Regional Commercial
District
South
Commercial
B-2: General Business
Office/Commercial
District
Commercial/Office
East
G2: General Commercial
Commercial/Office
(Shoreview)
B-2: General Business
West
Commercial
Office
District
3. Site Data:
Cite of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for May 6, 2009
IlMetro-inet.uslardenhills1P1anningiPlaiining Casesl2(I09W9-007Arden Plaza Site Pla17 Review—Signage (pending)W50609 - PC Report -Arden
Plaza Sign - Site Plan Reviev.doc Page 2 of 6
Pian Evaluation
1. Site Plan Review — Section 1260: Sign Standard Adjustments
Section 1260.01 of the Sign Code permits adjustments to sign height, number, type,
lighting, area, and/or location through the site plan review process if criteria number one
or two is met and the required criteria number three is met. In this case criteria one and
three are most applicable. The criteria are as follows:
1. There are site conditions which require a sign adjustment to allow the sign to be
reasonably visible from a street immediately adjacent to the site; or,
2. The sign adjustment will allow a sign of exceptional design or a style that will
enhance the area or that is more consistent with the architecture and design of
the site; and,
3. The sign adjustment will not result in a sign that is inconsistent with the purpose
of the zoning district in which the property is located or the current land use.
The applicant submitted a letter responding to the above criteria (Attachment A).
2. Purpose of the B-2 District
According to Section 1320.04 Subd. 7 the purpose of the B-2 General Business District is
as follows.-
1.
ollows:
1. To be a place in which people can live, work and play.
2. To create a compact, architecturally diverse, pedestrian- and bicycle -friendly
community with a distinct identity.
3. To provide a connected sidewalk system and places for people to gather and
socialize.
4. To implement design standards to promote an attractive environment with
lasting and sustainable value.
5. To group compatible retail and service business uses that tend to draw trade that
is naturally interchangeable and promotes business prosperity.
6. To provide an adequate supply of businesses and professional service areas to
meet the needs of the residents.
7. To minimize the effects of traffic congestion, noise, odor, glare and similar
safety problems.
8. To implement the Plan known as the "Guiding Plan for the B2 District," which
was adopted by the City Council on October 27, 2008.
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for May 6, 2004
I Metro-inet.uslardenhillslPlanninglPlannina Cases 12009W9-007 Arden Plaza Site Plan Review -Signage (pet?ding)W50609- PC Report -Arden
Plaza Sign - Site Plan Review.doc Page 3 of 6
Findines of Fact
The Planning Commission must make a finding as to whether or not the proposed sign standard
adjustment at 3585 Lexington Avenue meets the criteria in the Sign Code to deviate from the
sign regulations and if the relocation of the signage would adversely affect the surrounding
neighborhood and the community as a whole. Staff offers the following nine findings for
consideration:
1. The property is located in the B-2 Zoning District.
2. Arden Plaza is a conforming use in the B-2 Zoning District.
3. Portable signs that do not exceed six square feet are permitted without a permit.
4. Properties in Arden Hills are permitted to have two of these portable signs located
within fifteen feet of their primary entrance.
5. The applicant is proposing to designate a specified area within fifteen feet of their
primary driveway along County Road E for the placement of one permitted portable
sign.
6. The sign would not be visible from residential properties.
7. Section 1260 of the Sign Code permits deviations from the Sign Code through the site
plan review process.
8. The topography of the Arden Plaza site, the location of the office buildings, and the
placement of the tenants significantly limits the visibility of the businesses from
County Road E.
9. The proposed sign is for a conforming use in the B-2 Zone.
10. The sign would not have a negative impact on adjacent properties or the City as a
whole.
Resident Comments
Staff has not received any letters, e-mails, or telephone calls from property owners or occupants
in regard to this planning case. However, site plan reviews do not require a public hearing or
public notice.
Staff Recommendation
The existing topography on the site, the location of the office buildings, and the orientation of the
strip center drastically limits the visibility of the businesses from County Road E. This is a
unique situation amongst the businesses in Arden Hills. A permanent solution would include the
addition of a monument sign that adequately advertises the businesses located in the center and
meets the requirements of the Sign Code. In discussions with the tenants and the property owner
it became clear that this is a goal of any redevelopment that is to take place on the property, but
that implementing a permanent solution is premature given the anticipated Master PUD
application that will include a signage request. In the mean time the tenants have requested a
City of Arden Dills
Planning Commission Meeting -for May 6, 2009
1ilUetjo-iflet.uslai-denhillslPlanning(Planning Cases 12009W9-007 Arden Plaza Site Plan Review—Signage (pending)4150609 - PC Report -Arden
Plaza Sign - Site Plan Rerzew.doc Page 4 of 6
temporary solution that would allow them to effectively advertise their businesses while meeting
the requirements of the Sign Code. This application attempts to meet their needs.
Based on the submitted plans and findings of fact, Staff recommends approval of Planning Case
#09-007 for a Site Plan Review for a sign standard adjustment based on the findings of fact, the
submitted plans, and the following six conditions:
1. The project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted. Any significant
changes to these plans, as determined by the City Planner, shall require review and
approval by the Planning Commission.
2. One permitted portable sign that does not exceed six square feet, is not illuminated, and is
displayed only during regular business hours shall be allowed at a time in the designated
area within fifteen feet of the County Road E driveway.
3. The sign shall not be placed in the right of way.
4. The sign shall meet all other requirements of the Sign Code.
5. This approval shall not impact any temporary signage requirements of the Sign Code.
6. The sign standard adjustment shall expire upon the implementation of a new monument
sign on the site or within two years of the date of issuance, whichever comes first.
Options & Proposed Motion Lanuae
1. Recommend Approval with Conditions: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case
09-007 for a Site Plan Review at 3585 Lexington Avenue based on the findings of fact, the
submitted plans, and the six conditions in the May 6, 2009, Planning Case report.
2. Recommend Approval as Submitted: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 09-
007 for a Site Plan Review at 3585 Lexington Avenue based on the findings of fact and the
submitted plans in the May 6, 2009, Planning Case report.
3. Recommend Denial: Motion to recommend denial of Planning Case 09-007 for a Site Plan
Review at 3585 Lexington Avenue based on the following findings: findings to deny should
specifically reference the reasonsfor denial and why those reasons cannot be mitigated.
4. Table: Motion to table Planning Case 09-007 for a Site Plan Review at 3585 Lexington
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 April 22, 2009.
Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, the City must act on this request by June 21, 2009 (60 days),
unless the city provides the petitioner with written reasons for and additional 60 day review
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for May 6, 2009
11Metro-inet.uslaydenlrillslPlanrringlPlanning Cases 12009W9-007 Arden Plaza Site Plan Revieiv_Signage (pending)1050609 - PC Report - Auden
Plaza Sign - Site Plan Reiyiew.doc
Page 5 of 6
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 photo and photographs of the site
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for May 6, 2009
liMeti-o-inet.uslardenhillslPlanninglPlannin, Cases l2009W9-007A den Plaza Site Plan Review -Signage (pending)W50609 - PC Report - Arden
Plaza Sign - Site Plan Review.doc Page 6 of 6
Attachment A
Application and
Supporting Materials
I't
fii II�)EN_H1LLS
May 6, 2009, Planning Commission Meeting
Applicant Information
Ap licant: wellington Management C/o Kara Frank -
Address: 1 525 Energy Park drive Suite 100
Telephone No.:651-999-5535 Other:
Fax No.:
Email Address: kfrank@welfingtonmgt.cam
Property Information
Property owner: Arden Plaza LLC
- Owner Address: 1 625 Energy -Park Drive Suite 100
Owner Telephone No. 651-999-5535 other: fax: 551-292-0072
Address of Property Involved.:3585 Lexington Avenue North
kortlt 872 "t o1 the East % of the Northwoest quarter of Section 34, Township 30 north. Range 23 West except the West 625 feet thereof. Excepting from the abave described tract” lfdest 204 feet cf the Notih2e3 feet ac
_._Legal Description:
Prosy ID No.:41-1953176
YPe of use: Retail
Zone: Propertt Acreage: -_-
T pe of Request*
LJ Apportionment of Assessments ($30)
❑ Comprehensive Plan Amendment ($550)
J Conditional/Interim Use Permit or Amendment ($350)
J Final Plat ($400 + $25 per lot)
J Master Planned Unit Development ($600 +escrow)
LJ Final Planned Unit Development ($200)
Ll Planned Unit Development Amendment ($350)
J Zoning or City Code Amendment ($550)
Ll Land Use Requests -Not Already Specified ($200)
Ll Appeal of Administrative Decision ($75)
Ll Minor Subdivision (lot split/consolidation) ($425 +escrow)
❑ Preliminary Plat ($600 + $25 per lot +escrow)
LJ Variance (Zoning Code) ($350)
Ll Site Plan Review ($400)
Revised: 12-16-08
LJ Rezoning ($550)
0 Site Plan Review (Sign or Fence) ($250)
U Vacation of Easement or Right -of -Way ($300)
Pagel 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.
HILLS
Planning Case No. 09 -
„-AREN
Submittal Date
1245 West Highway 96
Application Completed Date
Arden Hills, Minnesota 55112
Accepted by
Telephone (651) 792-7800
Receipt Number
Fax (651) 634-5137
Council decision
www.ci.arden-hilfs.mn.us
Council Decision Date
2009 LAND USE APPLICATION
Applicant Information
Ap licant: wellington Management C/o Kara Frank -
Address: 1 525 Energy Park drive Suite 100
Telephone No.:651-999-5535 Other:
Fax No.:
Email Address: kfrank@welfingtonmgt.cam
Property Information
Property owner: Arden Plaza LLC
- Owner Address: 1 625 Energy -Park Drive Suite 100
Owner Telephone No. 651-999-5535 other: fax: 551-292-0072
Address of Property Involved.:3585 Lexington Avenue North
kortlt 872 "t o1 the East % of the Northwoest quarter of Section 34, Township 30 north. Range 23 West except the West 625 feet thereof. Excepting from the abave described tract” lfdest 204 feet cf the Notih2e3 feet ac
_._Legal Description:
Prosy ID No.:41-1953176
YPe of use: Retail
Zone: Propertt Acreage: -_-
T pe of Request*
LJ Apportionment of Assessments ($30)
❑ Comprehensive Plan Amendment ($550)
J Conditional/Interim Use Permit or Amendment ($350)
J Final Plat ($400 + $25 per lot)
J Master Planned Unit Development ($600 +escrow)
LJ Final Planned Unit Development ($200)
Ll Planned Unit Development Amendment ($350)
J Zoning or City Code Amendment ($550)
Ll Land Use Requests -Not Already Specified ($200)
Ll Appeal of Administrative Decision ($75)
Ll Minor Subdivision (lot split/consolidation) ($425 +escrow)
❑ Preliminary Plat ($600 + $25 per lot +escrow)
LJ Variance (Zoning Code) ($350)
Ll Site Plan Review ($400)
Revised: 12-16-08
LJ Rezoning ($550)
0 Site Plan Review (Sign or Fence) ($250)
U Vacation of Easement or Right -of -Way ($300)
Pagel 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 aescriotion of Reauest (urease also include a tvr)ed. detailed fetter exNainina the
Filina & Information Reauirements
The City requests that you make a pre -application meeting with the City Planner to discuss the application
process, requirements, and deadlines. Unless waived by the City Planner or Planning Commission, a certified
survey of the property is required for all applications. The Planning Commission and/or City Council may still
require a certified survey. A checklist for other required information is also available.
Complete/incomplete Applications
An incomplete application will delay the processing of land use requests. The application approval time
commences and an application is considered officially filed when the City Planner has received and examined
the application and determined that the application is complete. A decision on whether the application is
complete or incomplete shall be made within fifteen (15) working days following the submittal of the application.
When the application is deemed to be "complete" it shall be placed on the agenda of the first possible Planning
Commission meeting provided that all required public notices have been sent and published.
Payment of Fees
The undersigned acknowledges that she/he understands that before a land use application can be deemed
complete, all required information and fees (including all deposits) must be paid to the City. If additional fees
are required to cover costs incurred by the City, the City Planner has the right to require additional payment from
one or more of the undersigned, who shall be jointly liable for such fees. Such expenses may include (but are
not limited to) direct city payroll and overhead costs, fees paid to consultants and other professionals, and the
cost of printing, mailing, and supplies. The City may withhold final action on a land use application, withhold
building permits, 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: 12-16-08
Page 2 of 3
Agenda Deadline and Meeting 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 Phil. Meetings are held in the Council Chambers at the City
of Arden Hills, 1245 Vilest 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.
2009 SCHEDULE (*subject to change)
APPLICATION
DEADLINE
DATE*
TENTATIVE
PLANNING
COMMISSION
MEETING DATE*
(Generally held on the
first Wednesday at 6:30 . m.
TENTATIVE
CITY COUNCIL
MEETING
DATE*
(Generally held on the
last Monda at 7:00 . m .
December 1 2008
,�anua 7
Janua 26
January 5
Februa 4
February23
Februa 2
IUlarch 4
March :3Q
March 2
Aril 8
Aril 27
A 6
Ulla 6
Ma 25.
May 4
June 3
June 29
June 'I
JuI $
July' 27
July 6
August 5
August 31
August 3
Se tember
Se terrtber 28
September 7
October 7
October 26
October 5
November 4
November 30..
November 2
December 9
December 28
December 7
January 6 2010)
January 25': 2010
Acknowledgement and Signature
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
application.
ProVu¢ner Signature (Required)
Applicant Signature (If different than the property owner)
Date
Cte
Please contact the City Planner at (651 ) 792-7804
if you have any questions regarding this application.
Additional copies of this application form are available on the City's website: http:1 www. ci. arden-hills. n7n. us
Revised: 12-16-08
Page 3 of 3
April 22, 2009
Ms. Meagan Beekman
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
1245 West Highway 96
Arden Hills, MN 55112
RE: Temporary signage permit
Arden Plaza Retail Center
Dear Meagan:
Thank you for taking the time to present and consider our permit for temporary signage at
Arden Plaza Retail Center. As you are aware this site is currently under review for
redevelopment of the office segment to a Walgreens Pharmacy store. In the meantime,
our existing retail tenants struggle with adequate signage at the site due to a great lacy of
visibility from the major streets. I appreciate the opportunity to present this proposal for
temporary signage rights at the driveway entrance of County Road E.
Our request is for small temporary signage to be allowed on an interim basis until the
new development is approved and therefore, new signage is installed for all tenants.
Currently, there are significant visibility constraints due to the office building as well as
other intrusions which are detrimental to the existing businesses. We, as the owners of the
building would like to support our tenants and watch them grow. Therefore, they need to
be allowed adequate signage for their businesses. We plan to provide this opportunity on
a permanent basis once the pending development is complete, but need, for the interim, a
signage solution. These temporary signs will be removed immediately upon the
installation of new site signage following the development.
I have enclosed the application for temporary signage at the site. Please consider this
appeal to support the private businesses that make Arden Hills a thriving city. We, as an
owner, want to support both the city and our tenants and therefore feel that this is an
extremely important measure in ensuring their visibility.
Thank you for your consideration and cooperation.
Sincerely
Kara L. Frank
Property Manager
Enclosures
DEVELOPMENT, LEASING & PROPERTY MANAGEMENT
1625 Energy Park Drive, Suite 100 e St. Pauls MN 55108 TEL (651) 292-9844 FAX (651) 292-0072
F F11 www.wellingtonmgt.com
Attachment B
Air Photo and Photographs of the Site
It
--fi 1�N HILLS
May 6, 2009, Planning Commission Meeting
27
:'s
2
z
I C
92 toy- 5 tri a- r-11 -n
.. . .......
IX
g*��i
C'A
Kii�' X,
..........
7=
X
O'N
X.X:
.... ......
OR -
X.
A
"M -'K
cj,=
... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ . . . . . . .
----------------- . ............... . . . . . .
.............................. .
.......................... .. ......
......... M ... ....... cz
...............
iNx i.%�
g gE
MR 0
gg
,X M-%
........... ..
-.,. %XF� —
.. .............
.. .. . ... ........... .......
......... ...
................ ...... .. . . . ........
....... .............. . ....... . . . .
............ ................
............
tr"
........ .....
.. ..........
. .......... ....
... ...............
Pon*
... ...... ... . ..
----------------------- .. .. ....
... ... ..... ........... ..
................
.............. ........
........ ...
.... ...........
............. ...... ...... ....
... ....... ..........
... ..............
........... ......
.. ..........
..............
.. .......... ....
..........
.............
... ..................
.... . ........
..................................
... ........
"M .. ... ... . .
.. .......
............... . .....
. .....................
. .......... M
.....................
;:X.- ....................
. ............
. .................... .
OM
u
. . . . . . . . . . ...
rl I wil
50' ...........
-23 Ilu rA
wi�il
A
..........................
-MQ�
Z�
i -�gg gii
�.- -;;g .
cz;
IN
-�K K
ng
....... ......
. ...... .. 310
CZ
X.: XMI.
IN
A x,
X.,
MA
----------
r4
cz
NO
<
----- - - - - - - - - -
.... ......
..........
..........
iii�:jii
iRX
.. ................
�ex ..............
ggg
R
..... Oft
LK*,
.. .... ... ...
...... . . . . . .
...........
...... ....
I Bills
. ..................... ......
. . ........
T
03
U
cc
«3
O
O
U
w
� C
C
O N
it
C �
n
U% cc2
C �
_U U -�
C i U
QJ �-
o v '�
C
G � U
U �
� v
cl O
c V3
cz cc
� v
`a s
v�
v
o � o
U C;s
•� U G
Q T3
un U
ct
'� v r-
� � J
cz C
«S
U �
� U O
O G O
GSC
d3
O C's M
U � U
CZ t�
cc ,,
v �
cQ C
U
� � U
U�3
• c �
F
�o
� C N
4�
r.� U
CIS
too �r --
Q �
O
U
r-
ca
cal
W
J;
EN HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: May 6 2009 PC Agenda Item 5eA
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Meagan Beekman, City Planner
SUBJECT: Report from the City Council
April 13, 2009, City Council Meeting
There were no planning related items on the agenda for this meeting. As part of this meeting, the
City Council voted to approve a new sump pump ordinance that authorizes and_ regulates the
inspections of sump pumps in the City.
The City Council also adopted a Code Compliance Policy that outlines the process for handling
code complaints and violations in the City.
April 20, 2009, City Council Work Session
As part of this meeting, the City Council discussed the RFP process for the old city hall site. The
RFP is tentatively scheduled to be released in July, with responses due in August. A final
community meeting is also planned to discuss the RFP, though the date for this is yet to be
decided.
April 27, 2009, City Council Meeting
There were no planning related topics at this meeting.
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for May 6, 2009
\\Metro-1net. us\ardenhills`,PlanningTlanning Commission\CC Reports\050609 - PC report - CC report.doc
Page 1 of 2