HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-12-05 Planning Comm. AgendaAGENDA
CITY OF LITTLE CANADA
PLANNING COMMISSION
THURSDAY, MAY 12, 2005
1. Call To Order - 7:30 P.M.
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes -April 14, 2005
PRESENTATIONS:
4. Architectural Review and Tinal PUD Permit to add a freestanding sign to the
development -Rice Street -Edgewater Townoffice Park
Correspondence Pages 1-6.
Conditional Use Permit to allow the construction and operation of a monopole wireless
communications tower and equipment shelter - 3250 Spruce Sheet -New Cingular
Wireless
Correspondence Pages 7-19.
6. Amendment to the Zoning Code relative to outdoor storage in the Indushial-Park (I-P)
District
Correspondence Pages 20-25.
Amendment to the Zoning Code relative to banners as temporary signs, the size of
commercial/industrial real estate signs, and garage sale signs
Correspondence Pages 26-37.
8. Other Business
9. Adjourn
__ __ _ _________ __ ____ __ _ _ _ ___ /o sy
~xj
Little Canada, Minnesota PAID ~T~~%
APPLICAT90N FORM Rec. No.
Comprehensive Plan Amendment Conditional Use Permit
Zoning District Amendment Variance
Text Amendment Subdivision
P(Gwn~„ Planned Unit Development
~- Other 5', y vv (e U) ew ~a ~ f
~o`""""^'SSi~` Plan Review
IJu~ as~o {~~~e SF~ce~ (ds~~as'S-ly~ts
Applicant (~~~ (Phone)
(Name) (Address)
Cus ay cwt 6or E~gewc,}off Ro~r~
Ec9 ewa Jf ` Ccrr ~C xkx (~:tc sfiV~e~t
Owner ~ e r ~owk r Gc (Address) (Phone)
(Name)
Property Location (Street Address and Legal Description):
xxx I'Si ce s {.tre
L~,t- !S. ~31oetX' ( Erb
~~st- s~r9e v~ __ R.~
-er ~~WNd~~~ (~aJ'(. CCc~.n.<~y[ ~o+
6~fwe>°~ ~~~~ ~- c.R .
Description and/or Reason for Request (Cite Ordinance Sections)
q In r~ U `• P c¢ -Fc>-v' n- e
`JCr(' ~
e~br~/ g'
[
51 <• C
-F-1~~ ~ ~ q ~ w~ ~- e
/a.~
S i ~ c9 ~ n..et~ ~ v~-f S I,c Dvf t~
In signing this application, I hereby acknowledge that I have read and fully understand the applicable provisions of the Zon-
3 and Subdivision Ordinances and current administrative procedures. I further acknowledge the fee explanation as outliln ac
In the application procedures and hereby agree to pay all statements received from the City pertaining to additional app
tion expense.
Q-- ~ ~/ ~sl ~s
~) w-~ h9w~'~---;i~~
(Signature of Applic 1 (Date)
,a~~~a,
wHITe--Office ::ANAf7Y--Cus[o mer ?INK-rile GOLD-Planner
NIAYOR
Hill 6lesener
`(~J~ ~ ~~
~G~GIB -CJGG7'GC/~Q
COUNCIL
Jim LaValle
Ride Mon[our
Darbara Atla^
John Keis
516 Little Canada Roz~d, Little Canexla, MN 66 1 17-1 600 ADMTN151T2A1~R
(651) 766-4029 /1:.4X: (651) 766-4-048 Jocl R. Hanson
unvw, ci.l ittle-ca Had a. mn, u s
CITY OF LITTLE CANADA
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW & FINAL PUD PERMIT FOR SIGNAGE
PROPOSAL:
A request for approval of an Architectural Review and Final PUD Permit to add a freestanding sign to
the Edgewater Townoffice Park. The property in question is zoned General Business (B-3).
APPLICANT & PROPERTY OWNER:
Edgewater Townoffice Park Owners' Association
2570 Rice Street
Little Canada, MN 55113
PROPERTY LOCATION:
Edgewater Townoffice Park
Lot 15, Block 1, Edgewater Townoffice Park
Little Canada, MN 55113
PLANNING COMMISSION:
The Little Canada Planning Commission will be reviewing this matter at their regular meeting
scheduled for Thursday, May 12, 2005 meeting. The meeting begins at 7:30 p.m. and will be held in
the Council Chambers of the City Center located at 515 Little Canada Road in said City.
CITY COUNCIL:
Notice is hereby given that a Public Hearing will be held by the City Council to review this request at
their regular meeting to be held on Wednesday, May 25, 2005 at 7:30 p.m., or as soon thereafter as
parties may be heard, in the Council Chambers of the City Center located at 515 Little Canada Road in
said City.
All persons with reference to this matter will be heard during the Planning Commission meeting on
Thursday, May 12, 2005 and the City Council meeting on Wednesday, May 25, 2005.
Sign language interpreters for hearing-impaired persons are available for public hearings upon request.
The request for this service must be made aC least 96 hours in advance. Please call to make the
necessary arrangements.
Joel R. Hanson
City Administrator
Summary
The Edgewater Town Office Park and its board of directors are seeking
preliminary plan approval from the planning commission for a new entry monument sign.
The original developer had preliminary plans for a sign that was not completed. I have
met with the Little Canada planner on two occasions to formulate the sign details.
We are proposing a two sided, non-electrical post sign. The face of the sign will
be painted, extruded aluminum with vinyl graphics. The face will be a darker color with
graphic color to match building exterior. We have chosen a sign style to compliment the
developments architecture. The base of the sign will be a spread concrete footing. The
footing size will be dependent on the square footage of the sign face. The final size will
be used to calculate the wind load which will determine footing size and depth. The sign
will be externally lit by flood lights from the ground.
I have contacted the Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed District. I spoke with
Ms. Tina Carstens at the District office. She had no specific objections as the proposed
sign lay outside of the delineated wetland area.
I am acting as an agent for the Edgewater Homeowners Association. I am the
contact for this project and will be available for any questions. I can be reached at (651)
255-1445 or (612) 987-1994. I (we) appreciate your attention to this project.
Sincerely,
Tony DuBay
Secretary-Edgewater HOA
9' x 8'-NON electrical, 2 sided Metal piton sign, w/vinyl graphics
1 S"Square piton Sleeve
Concrete Footing
DB Signs 651-464-6660
fax651-464-7760
Location:2SS4 Rice St., Little Canada
i m w ~~
J
W O Z ~
a Fa u r aa
~~' o xa m =4
a
r
~~ ~ 0305
~,.l„ Z aWN,~
V^- ~ ~ rWQyOp /~/
G` _ ~ a a a ~ i
w oa I I
~ I I
a I I
~ I
I
I I
~ =~ I i
1
~~ Z I ~
I I
I ,-- -~
~ I -- I
W li
li
ii ~~
o II o~~
w~ I I +°irn N
o I I °~?w
w ~ I ( NU.
®~ I ( ~N
I I Nay ~
~ i I o+ rn
I I NU W
I i
r~
> >
~~ ~(~~`
>-
G 9;,Q ~
M
oI ~
o w
~ v
L o
® U
J `T
a
i
^
l
~
m
w
w
N
0
x
c~
Z
N
w
II O M
--19'£9Zt ~_
+~-m-aerrr~ip I I
dl4 „9 ~ ~~~
ww
w__
~"+I~IB'y .IJM""~'~~~
00~
c
Or«
c0 ~ m
N~~3
zags
~N~~
N~~m
ms ~n
~av-0
Jyy~N
~J
%%
Y
iI._
~~
II'
~~.. ..._.. _. _ .. .... . U
7
~n ,
l ~eo r ~'
~
...
., .,
.
1
;
,
~, ~ ~
I ;
~ ~
!~
.,, I , ,V
' s
,. ~ ail
~_
'.
I'i ~
- I
~ ',V
- ~ I
I
rl
i
i
~ ci
a Y
~' e
~'.[ I 1
-.. Y. ') l l
a
1~1
I
I
i
I
/ I .;
I~ ~ ~
i~
? I ~ i I \ w ~
a
I I I ~ _.
~a i ~
' ~
~ _.
I I
I I
I ~
'
a~~ ~
I
~ i
~I~ _
Ik
~.
~
i
I ~__
1 r~".
"b h
~
I i
! ~
~
4
' _
t
I q
t
I
/ T
2 .
~ a S
~
ig I ~ f I I
~ n\ I
... I
~
I I
is ,
,:
r In °
L~,
~ ~
y~'
~ ~ I I p~
I ~ I
_~ _
I
'~ _
y~
~)
'
~ I° I
I i
_ i i
tiJ/
bM1
p
~ i^ i =~~~ i 3
I" 1'
~ is
° e ~ i°.~ _ _ I ~ ~
~
{
Ri
- ~, I
I I
I I
I
~~ ~
dt _ ~
I ___.
_
~ r O
I ~
US
~e '
F ~x
' I
' I ...
I J I
I'
~ ,' ! i i ~~ ___
l m
e a i ~~~ si - i .__ ~.~ i
~ ~ d ~ A ~ ~ ~
`
.v ~
r
..
i
4
I
~ _ ..l
i
I I '
~:.
I
n
~
~
L Y[ i ~~ I I
ry
4) .i..
19
~ ~
r
t
~ A
c
6 '
~ ~ ___ _
-1 I _
~ i i _
'
~
~~
F ~ r
~ r
~
~
..
~ i
._I i I 'I"` a 'I
I~ ~
~
' t i 4 ~ ~ ~ I .,
i C.~ __
I
~ ° I~ ~ ~ i
I, f . a t
q I
i I i
~~Wff I I 1 f I bt ~
I I
I I
~M~9
p
~~ r
I
I
I
I
~ ..v
I I ~ ~
I
f I i ~~
I
I
'
I t
i
I
~ '
I
_` I
I I ~
i
i i
' 1
r
.__ I ,.
I .. 1
I ~ I ~ ~ ~~
m `
T ~
. a
•
'
.a~
. ~:
..
~,Y r mR x.........m
...... ..... ...: i..,.
~' v
J
'
j _ _.__. _. L ..i .___. _____ ''~
~~ ~ FV
£L
~i
,~ ~ c
i ~ I.+
,
A
~
-;
a~i ~ / .
~
~g /0~ 5
Little Canada, Minnesota PAID ~~,ooo ____
APPLICATION FORM Rec. No. ___
__. Comprehensive Plan Amendment _._..x- Conditional Use Permit
__. Zoniny District Amendment
Text Amendment
_ _ Other
_ _.__ Variance
__ .__ Subdivision
__ Planned Unit Development
____ Plan Review
~.1rre~es5 H~.++d NNJ Fars LLL 2515 24~4/}de.,S. 11 ~nnegon)i5 HIJ SSyo~, tiz-~a~-i((o
Applicant_~1e~(~r_y-r1a/ q ~ __ -i-d ----
(~amel (Address) (Phone)
});11t>'ei~ QeJ~laPrhw'J' LLLQ 2H2N ~~~., ay NE .„„~. olr"1 N~Wf3 6i~-3~1- oie~
Owner - _ - --__.. ~ < . _S~_r.--- --
(Name) (Address) (Phone)
Property Location (Street Address and Legal Description)
3250 ,~/~.e._.Stvee~ ~L~t1'e.Cµrnw.lny__rt~~ -Sst!7_--
_.._~--°"s_~cS~1-_ SN~J(y wllsr~~L ~~b at'Kwih~ _C~y~_?,[..
Description and or Reason for Request Kite Ordinance Sections)
Con S~Y~n~.Q'1~__0.~41~~2_ a _I~0 WtvrnO~olc t,/iJ'cltls__COrr.~rC..nrr(g/'rar.i 'rNC;~f~Y wi~ w (L'K~S~
e~tvl~~aWie,~7 S_~cl~w'._v.1;~~9~5!...SC~._L'~w..~oh~._Oh~he:Sv_~.~~tu~ ~r./(e~. ~~nn~.lnr LJJr~~es5 _ _
~u; ~ ~~ ~ I 5 wr r 1" OJ WgaP ~.~H') C /1 ~ I
Ye.1_. fOJ1 Q ~~N,+~ ~i~(6_ZS __.f'~__.~~~V. o!lfG_~. Z 4 Gn a oh9 _..
_ ~__.._ ~R__ -~
L(~n1`, ~ndlt~ St..~~on `la3.IHD oj~~ tore. SCe- (ovfe/ Ie'~f~.~~xr7'y,t/ r.~c.7.,r~S, -__ .
In signing this application, I hereby acknowledge that I have read and fully understand the applicable provisions of the Zon
ina and Subdivision Ordinances and current administrative procedures. I further acknowledge the fee explanation as outlirteci
ii ~ application procedures and hereby agree to pay all statements received from the City pertaining to additional appiica-
tion expense.
n
/~ n ~~
~l ~,D•.,y~ ~1 ryn~ i / (;N~ laK ate.( ~rL `-I-~I-03 __
(Signature of Applicant) (Date)
WHITE-Office CANARY-Customer PINK-File GO Ln-Planner "~iyi°
rornrorz
t4i11 [3lesener
~L i~ (1~
P "E(~/ ~ CCY~ti~trt~~
COUNCIL
Jinn LaValle
Ricl< Montour
Barbara Allan
JoPm Kefs
615 Litfle C~~uiada Road, Litae Canada, MN 65ll 7-1600 AUMIIIVISTRAI'OR
(651) 766-4029 / FA?.: (651) 766-4048 .loci R. Manson
~xnaw. ci.litUe-eanada. mn. us
CITY OF LITTLE CANADA
NOTICE OF PUBLIC REARING
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
PROPOSAL:
A request for approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow the construction and operation of a
monopole wireless communications tower and equipment shelter. The property in question is zoned
Industrial-Park (I-P).
APPLICANT:
New Cingular Wireless Headquarters, LLC
2515 24`h Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55406
PROPERTY OWNER:
Hillcrest Development, LLP
2424 Kennedy Street NE
Minneapolis, MN 55413
PROPERTY LOCATION:
3250 Spruce Street
Little Canada, MN 55117
PLANNING COMMISSION:
The Little Canada Planning Commission will be reviewing this matter aC their regular meeting
scheduled for Thursday, May 12, 2005 meeting. The meeting begins at 7:30 p.m. and will be held in
the Council Chambers of the City Center located at 515 Little Canada Road in said City.
CITY COUNCIL:
Notice is hereby given that a Public Hearing will be held by the City Council to review this request at
their regular meeting to be held on Wednesday, May 25, 2005 at 7:30 p.m., or as soon thereafter as
parties may be heard, in the Council Chambers of the City Center located at 515 Little Canada Road in
said City.
All persons with reference to this matter will be heard during the Planning Commission meeting on
Thursday, May 12, 2005 and the City Council meeting on Wednesday, May 25, 2005.
Sign language interpreters for hearing-impaired persons are available for public hearings upon request.
The request for this service must be made at least 96 hours in advance. Please call to make Che
necessary arrangements.
Joel 2 Hanson, City Administrator
April I 1 °i, 2005 ~=R~CAfV TOW.R
Mr. Steve Grittman
Planning Department
City of Little Canada
515 Little Canada Rd.
Little Canada, MN 55117
Dear Mr. Grittman,
I am submitting this cover letter and supporting documents along with an Application
Form for a Conditional Use Pern7it on behalf of Cingular Wireless for the purpose of
constructing and operating a monopole wireless communications facility on the property
located at 3250 Spruce Street. The address of the property owners, Hillcrest
Development, LLLP, is 2424 Kennedy Str. NE Minneapolis, MN 55413
Cingular Wireless (formerly AT&T Wireless) has hired the services of American Tower
Corporation (ATC) to assist them in expanding their wireless conmiunications coverage
in the metro area. Cingular will be adding antennas to a number of existing American
Tower Corporation towers and other existing towers in the metro area.
American Tower Corporation, publicly traded on the New York Stock Exchange, is the
leading independent owner and operator of wireless communication towers in the United
States. ATC's primary business is the leasing of antenna sites on multi-tenant towers to a
diverse range of wireless communications industries, including persona] communication
services, paging, cellular, as well as radio and television broadcasters. We operate
approximately 13,000 towers nationwide. We also provide a full line of services to the
wireless communications industry. In this case, we are providing our services on a
consulting basis.
Here, Cingular Wireless desires to expand their wireless coverage along Interstate 694 in
the Rice Street area. Cingular requires their comnumications equipment to be located
within a % mile radius of selected Lat/Long coordinates and certain heights above ground
level. Deviation from this search ring would leave coverage gaps in their network that
would require additional new communication sites. There is only one tower within
Cingular's search ring and it is not structurally capable of holding Ciugular's equipment.
(See separate letter "Exhausting Co-location possibilities").
Thus, Cingular Wireless is proposing to construct a 150' monopole wireless
comnumications tower and place a 12'x 20' equipment shelter inside a fenced compound
on the subject parcel. The proposed ]ease site is 40-feet by 20-feet. The tower will be
designed to be structurally capable of holding 2 additional sets of antennas, so no new
towers will be needed in the area.
AMERICAN TOWER CORPORATION 11225 90 ~" AVE NORTH lP202, MAPLE GROVE , MN 55369 7631493-0037 FAX 7631425-2954
From speaking with you, it will require Cingular Wireless to gain a Conditional Use
Permit to allow for construction of the monopole tower and antennas. In addition, the
City of Little Canada has an ordinance pertaining to towers and antennas (Section
903.140). I have outlined below how we propose to alleviate any preliminary concerns or
issues the City of Little Canada may have regarding our tower project.
• Effect of suck grant on the Ixealth, general welfare, safety and economic prosperity of
the City and of the imz~zediate area in which such use would be located:
The establishment, maintenance, and operation of a wireless communications facility will
neither be detrimental to nor endanger the public health, safety, morals, comfort, or
genera] welfare because Cingular complies with the health and safety standards of the
Federal Communications Connnission (FCC). The FCC requires all Personal
Communications Service Providers Yo meet strict standards set by independent safety and
standard groups, namely the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) and the
Institute of Electrical acid Electronics Engineers (IEEE).
The wireless communications tower and shelter will not impede the normal/orderly
development/improvement of the sun-ounding property because the facility will be
secured in a six (6) foot chain link fence with three (3) strands of barbed wire. Also,
Cingular's equipment shelter has a low profile design and will not physically interfere
with development.
In addition, Cingulaz's antennas operate on a specific frequency licensed by the FCC,
therefore, the proposed location will not cause electromagnetic interference with other
wireless providers, police, fire, or emergency communications, or any nearby televisions
or radios.
• Effect oz2 the established character and quality of the area, its physical
attractiveness, the zuovement of traffic, the demand for related services, the
possible hazardous, lxarnafid noxiozts, offensive, or nzcisazxce effects resulting from
noise, dust, smoke, or odor and other factors:
There is adequate ingress/egress off of Spruce SCreet for Cingular's initial construction
and maintenance phases. Access to the tower site will not create traffic congestion in
public streets. Cingular's facility is un-manned, therefore the proposed use and
development will neither cause traffic congestion nor draw signifcant amormts of traffic
through public streets.
Once construction is complete, visits are typically made to the site once every two
months to perfoi7n routine maintenance. There will be no possible harmful, noxious,
offensive, or nuisance effects resulting from noise, dust, smoke, or odor and other factors
by the placement of the wireless communications tower.
• Con2plr.ance witk City of Little Canada Ordinance
As required by the ordinance, the proposed tower is a monopole design. It will be hot-
dipped in zinc oxide to make it corrosive resistant and give it a gray matte color. The area
around the base of the tower and equipmenC shelter will be fenced (with barbed wire) to
prevent unauthorized climbing. The proposed location is in an Industrial-zoned parcel.
The proposed tower is approximately 113'from Che closest property line. It is greater
than the height of the tower from the other property lines and right-of--ways. If the City
desires, a letter from a registered engineer can be provided stating that the tower would
fall within % the height of the tower, or 75'.
The proposed tower will be structurally designed to hold additional sets of antemlas for at
least 2 future wireless carriers to co-locate upon. Given the topography, Cingular RF
engineers have indicated that the 150' mounting height for their antennas is necessary to
provide adequate coverage for their grid system.
A separate letter and radio frequency propagation maps will be provided by Cingular RF
engineers showing the need for the proposed tower site.
Also enclosed are the following documents in support of our application:
• Little Canada Application Form -CUP request
• 2 11"x I7" Copies of the Proposed Site Plan and Elevation Drawings
• 15 Copies of "Exhaustion of Co-location possibilities" letter
• 15 Copies of the reduced size Site Plail and Elevation Drawings
• IS Color Copies of photos of a Cingular Wireless equipment shelter.
• Check for $500 made payable to the City of Little Canada.
Thank you for your time and consideration in reviewing this letter. If you should have
any questions or concerns about our proposal to locate a wireless communications facility
at the subject site, please feel free to contact me.
Si(ncerely,'~~
Mark Rohn
Zoning Representative
American Tower Corp.
Office 763-493-0037
Mobile 612-325-3120
Pax 763-425-2954
/tINI=RICAN TOW °R
April 11'", 2005
Mr. Steve Griltman
Planning Department
City of Little Canada
515 Little Canada Rd.
Little Canada, MN 55117
RE: Exhausting Co-location possibilities
Dear Mr. Gritlman,
As a parC of our consulting services agreement with Cingular Wireless we follow a site
development process flowchart. When we are assigned a "search ring" for a site, as set
out on a map, our first step is to search Che assigned area and locate all existing towers,
water Canks, and tall structures.
After investigating all the existing structures, we relay this information to Cingular in the
form of Lat/Long coordinates and open mounting heights for their antennas. If one of the
existing structures meets the coverage requirements of Cingular Wireless, we enter into
lease negotiations with the tower/structure owner to determine business terms to locate
their antennas on the structure.
If there are no tall structures within the search area, we determine the closest tall
structures just outside the search area to see if there is an outside chance it might be
feasible from a coverage standpoint. If not, we seek out landowners within the search ring
who wo~ild be willing to lease us a small parcel of land so thaC we can construct a new
communications tower.
Here, there is one tall structure within the search ring (see map). This is a search ring
with a % mile radius. The existing MNDOT monopole tower would not he structurally
capable of holding the proposed 12 antennas and 12 coax lines for Cingular Wireless.
There is one communication Cower outside the Cingular Wireless search ring that is a
150' monopole that currently has 2 wireless carriers on it. The highest open mounting
spot on the tower is approximately 120'. However, deviation from Cingular' search ling
would leave coverage gaps in their network that would require additional new
communication sites.
With this information, and uo ocher tall structures in the area, we began searching for a
landowner to lease us property for a new tower site. hi searching for a site for a tower, we
prefer Co locate towers in industrial or agricultural zoned parcels. In these areas, towers
AMERICAN TOWER CORPORATION 11225 90T" AVE NORTH #202, MAPLE GROVE , MN 55369 763/493-0037 PAX 7631425-2954
have less of an impact compared to proposing them near densely populated residential
areas.
The proposed tower site is the result of ow• search. The site is currently located off
Spruce Street on an industrial parcel.
Sin~^ 1~
Mark Holm
American Tower Corp.
Office: 763-493-0037
Mobile: 612-325-3120
Cingular Wireless Search Ring
Grnsr L<rke
;~
Cardigan
~adnari.r hake
CARDIGAN-
CARDIGAN RD 'ARDEN ,~\FFPN~ ~N N
OOHANSEY yq' __ _ a
p4- MNDOT wimpy monopole) '
w N4S 02.673' a
r ~ o' ~ W93° 06.521'
Lake Wabnsso
RD
w ~
O y
x K
~' _
4
_-
a
~ o
R
-
,.-:
sP .w~~
sy
os,
1 Search Ring C
\ N45° 02.431'
Lake Omassa W93°06.399'
E
Ne Cingular Wireless
Prop used monopole
N45 02.369'
W93° 05978'
Twm
_. RYAN-CN1 z,
t N
' ___.______ r ~ ~'
~ ~ '
~z ~ ~ A
I Gk _.U 7.1 O
FAQ O~
~- wasso-scvD w ~` - pp
O =., SOWA5YOR~ON RDGo
t Place all ~ z
1 ~ p K
~Z MAPLE"LN" O
D `nd,
IK 7~J ~ CABORE ' 'F~
aJ ~ t ~Z
0
n v ~ i
? ~
- BRYAN
<i "Z~ 2
tt
N ~~@q~ ~
yon ~~ ~ ~
o ti x
()
2
~ O~ OC .. ~~. 1150 MOIIOpeIG~
5, = p STANBRIDGE Z
. <~s`/~~ = m o i2 cazllcrs on it
mlLCwooD ~ ! N45 OL924'
~FSp LW 93° 06.193' , al
~~ t MAPCE:CANE p '~'~`r'i
~ T/ HILISCOURTE NORTH
~2eY / ~ ~
n -:..:,r' i _...y CR C2W CR~7 ST.E
f~ m z w 1
~ ,y m-TERRACE
-'
Mag 15.00 Scale 1:15,625 (at center)
Mon Apr 11 16:30 2005 1000 Feet
..__.._... _....._. _..._ _. _._I
Local Road
Y
~ ,
_. ..-
n~
~ i lip I
r s~ t i
~ i as£ o
I a
4
~
I
I
I
°_
g ~ a - wl ;
-.8 i ~y o 0 0' ~ G ?, 5
i ' p3; ~ 1 ' W
~ Q
I ~- w = d
~r 4 it ~ i' 3 O :i U
i= ~ i
i~ E
~~~
T
I
~
~
a
€ d
ii ~ } ° ~~ ~
e~ O - _ z
`~ a
lil ~d
e ~' Z LL
Z ~
~ ~
~ ~
~ ~
~
,~
~
~~~ I U
l _ a ~ Q ~ 3
e
_- ~ ~ ~ r ~ Y$ ~
- _
a
~ _
t
°
~
~
? ., R, .. l
a ~ ~ .,, . ~ a s o }
.. ,.
p
w
~ - - -
- 2'~~~'~ ~ i
~" N { JT
~ i9 .. .. -, 4
LL
r
~
- ~ a
I
~
_ a ~
rc i j I
x
'`
U Q ^ .~ Oi^_~'
.~.~ ___.~ I
i
~ s tl 4
Vl T W a~ ~ ii aes ~ i II s
i
~ w TV ~~~
~
~'~ 1 ~~
~ W ~ Z
~ h i ~
!~ Q ~ y s ~ma ~
~
~ //~~
•
v/ ~ ~ ~.
o
Z g
W Q
~ ~ ~ L
Id w = ~
~y ~/~
/ryy++ ~
Li. W _ _ Z U ~ E ~ $=
s ~ K W ~.. _ ~ rn • i-
_
~ X q c]
S
~ ~ - / `Y
I
z ZW =~_
o ~ W ~ o ;
~~p .s~-. ,~,.
~ a
w
z
(n Z ~w
a
W W
a
j w
m ~
W
~ ¢ a ¢ ¢ N
Z
~ U
J ~
d
~ _
d a
Z m
H ~
N
2
i
w
w '>
x z
~
N W > ~
W > Z
¢ ¢ j
x
J J
=
F N d J
W
O N N N ;A~ei
Z d a d d ;%?±
i
=+"i
(7
Z m m m
z T
z i
N.;f.`•~r
s z
N
- ii
a N J
^ a d
_ z W
f
r
ii
-_._ ____
- -.___
i `'
IT- ' i
-____ 9r6r OLS 66x J ! rI
.. _r_T_ _
~ < ~.
e' ~ ~ q
Y _ Ii
~~~ Ye `~ i v( '. F i
f ~'. ~ y
\V ~- I l;!
3~i ~/{ ~ E~ ~' ''~i bfif e a
tt j % Y
4 ( d d + ~~81 8 8 8'S ) t `I
8. 3 ~ ~, w i lI xf `s ,M1
y I
- 1 R ~ +i
~ i. Hex S ~s & ~ l 'r i
i
T
~ i ~ ~ .I_ I ~I I J.
S ~ I
-~
_ T< m
~ ~ 90~ 3,02 ss SBS _ ~"'"~"'"- - j t a j s `_
m
¢ ~
... ~...c. .e ~..e d p ry ~ ~ ~
N ~
'~ s ~i ~ 5 ~ _.~ ~ ,, 9 x 3 a ~ ~ ~ ~ -
~s ~gl
J~ m+ Y6b 3m ~
f I I ~e
;~ I ,. JJJ>~ ~ sG ~''~~~a
i ,~
LI 3 a
i'.C.:L~ ~ J r 1} N C
J s'
S ." _
' -. _ .. ° „~~ ~ V }7•
• B a.
.. ) ~§' w
- I = _ ¢ w
~ ~ m ¢
dpi/ ~ 1 ~ ` 's. ~s 2 w
b69 ~~ ~ F; t 5 m ~ ~ U
.Oh ``` I S ~ 3 a ^
"„P ~Y . ~ x' w ~c
€yg ,tsN~ ,~_ ..
S
~ }f~~~o¢ S £ g x ~ xd g.
q S
e b _ ~ 5 4 .,
t.~5 bM1b3 d E _
a a °b< 5 $ a _
e K > t..
b
A I i!r.
4 ? g ,b xR x a ~ a a~ ~ e_ 3fzzb
d G £ P bbd 2
_, ~_
1
r
"` .. r
5 _.f3
~~~
l
i ~~,I
-~ ~.
~ I ~ Y
._,.:y...~ a
L » a e _
w E f
a/~ T S~
~. ~ e~
•V ~ x,
X 5'F
a w
w
~¢
~~
Z
N U
J Q
a
~ z
o R
z a
m
w ~u
t r
N"}
S
z}
i ~.;
?te!
s 1~.~6.
~;:,~
u
ii~~ti
______~
I ..
~_ _ _ ~
. I;
:'
,,P
-; ; --
::1
9 ~~
liv
(a
I i'..
5.,;
T ;h~°~
J~:
&y
ag °' ~ a.
~~ - ~_
~~ _ z .
$.,
r ~-
~n~=: -
(p'w gr s:
C ~ ~;
,X~,a
Y ~~
H
Q W
W
rn
.~- N
Z
~ U_
J ~
a
~ °z
d 3
Z m
Cif N >
9;
- -~
--_- ~ -
___-
= ~ r
,- -~
~'s~~t:
iY
~,
__. __-__ -__... oaow bzS aT i":
~.~u .n = it!'I
i,~
Close up photo of pebblestone exterior
12'x20' equipment shelter - pebblestone finish
~t
(/~ ~C~C-~~lP.~ - GIC/i/Z~CP.
575 Little Canada Road, Little Canada, MN 55 1 1 7-1600
(651) 7GG-4029 /FAX: (651) 766-4045
w~anv. ci.litile-canacta.mn.us
CITY Or LITTLE CANADA
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
ZONING CODE AMENDMENT
N,9t1'OR
Bill f3lesener
COUNCIL
Jim LaV~lle
Rid: N10n1.01Ar
I3arbzra tUl1n
John 1{eis
ADMINISTRATOR
Joel R. Hanson
PROPOSAL:
A request for an amendment to the Zoning Code relative to the amount, location, and development
standards for outdoor storage in the Industrial-Park (I-P) District.
PLANNING COMMISSION:
The Little Canada Planning Commission will be reviewing this matter at their regular meeting
scheduled for Thursday, April 14, 2005 meeting. The meeting begins at 7:30 p.m. and will be held in
the Council Chambers of the City Center located at 515 Little Canada Road in said City.
CITY COUNCIL:
Notice is hereby given that a Pubic Hearing will be held by the City Council to review this requesC at
their regular meeting to be held on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 at 7:30 p.m., or as soon Chereai`Cer as
parties may be heard, in the Council Chambers of the City Center located at 515 Little Canada Road in
said City.
All persons with reference to this matter will be heard during the Planning Commission meeting on
Thursday, April 14, 2005 and the City Council meeting on Wednesday, Apri127, 2005.
Sign language interpreters for hearing-impaired persons are available for public hearings upon request.
The request for this service must be made at least 96 hours in advance. Please call to make the
necessary arrangements.
Joel R. Hanson
City Administrator
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC.
4800 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 202, Golden Valley, MN 55422
Telephone: 763.231.2555 Facsimile: 763.231.2561 planners<a~nacpla nning.com
MEMORANDUM
T0: Little Canada Planning Commission
FROM: Stephen Grittman
DATE: April 14, 2005
RE: Little Canada -Outdoor Storage in I-P Zoning
FILE NO: 758.10 - 05.02
The Industrial Park district allows outdoor storage as a conditional use. The terms of
the Conditional Use Permits are as follows:
Open and outdoor storage as an accessory use, provided that:
1. Storage area, in combination with semi-truck or trailer parking as
defined in Section 918.040, B does not exceed seventy-five (75)
percent of the gross floor area of the principal structure or twenty-
five (25) percent of the lot area, whichever is less.
2. The area is fenced and screened from view of neighboring residential
uses and districts in compliance with Section 903.020, G of this
Ordinance.
3. Storage is screened from view of the public right-of-way in compliance
with Section 903.020, G of this Ordinance.
4. Storage area is black top or concrete.
5. All lighting shall be hooded and so directed that the light source shall
not be visible from the public right-of-way or from neighboring
residences and shall be in compliance with Sections 902.020, I of
this Ordinance.
6. Area does not take up parking space as required for conformity to this
Ordinance.
7. The provisions of Section 921.010, C of this Ordinance are considered
and satisfactorily met.
8. No outdoor storage area in the I-P, Industrial Park District shall be
located closer to any public street than the required building
setback line or the actual constructed line of the building, whichever
is farther from the street.
9. No outdoor storage area shall include storage of materials that are
considered hazardous materials by the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency.
10. In side or rear yards, no outdoor storage area in the I-P, Industrial
Park District shall be closer to any property line than ten (10) feet.
In a separate section of the ordinance, the screening fence is required to be wood or
masonry, and such fences in industrial areas may be up to eight feet in height.
The City granted a Conditional Use Permit for outdoor storage to Orius, a utility
contractor along Spruce Street, south of Country Drive. The storage area met the
conditions of the zoning ordinance. However, due to the location, and storage area was
visible from the street (it was located to the side of the building). Moreover, Orius
created a bigger problem by storing equipment that was higher than the screening
fence, as well as allowing storage to spill over the fence, outside the storage area.
Orius has recently vacated the property. The original CUP was written tightly to apply to
the type of storage proposed by Orius, and there is question whether a new occupant
would be able to exercise the original permit. Regardless, due to concerns over both
the legal and illegal storage issues raised by the Orius property, the City has enacted a
moratorium on new Conditional Use Permits for outside storage in this district until the
ordinance can be reviewed and reconsidered.
Planning staff is seeking Planning Commission input on issues related to the following:
Size of storage area -current regulation 75% of building area.
2. Location of storage area, e.g. side yards or rear yards only, etc.
Height and visibility of storage, e.g. visibility from adjoining streets, regardless of
screening.
4. Other issues related to outdoor storage in the I-P District.
With the information discussed at this meeting, planning staff will develop a draft
ordinance for consideration in May.
iVIINIJTI;S
PLANNING COMMISSION
APRIL 14, 2005
Watershed for approval. Hillcrest is not proposing to do anything with the
land at this point other Chan subdivide it. The Planner indicated that the
subdivision request is straightforward, and noted that there are streets and
utilities already servicing the property.
Rheaume asked any the need for any environmental analysis. HIein
reported that Chey have done a Phase I and II environmental analysis on
the property.
Socha asked if the billboard was an issue. Klein reported that the lease for
the billboard has a provision which cancels the lease if the property is
developed. Therefore, the billboard will be removed upon development of
the property. The Planner noted that currently the billboard is the
principal use of the property. The billboard would have to be removed
upon development of the lot. Duray asked if the City could put a sunseC
clause on the billboard. The Plainer replied that the City could not given
there are State Law protections for the billboard. To remove the billboard
would take an eminent domain action which would be considered a taking
causing the City to pay for removal, acquisition, and future income costs.
The Planner noted Chat the best lever is the lot size requiremenC of a
minimum of 40,000 square feet. He noted that eventually the land
becomes Coo valuable to have its sole use as that of a billboard.
Klein indicated that that is correct. The land will be Coo valuable to use
solely Yor a billboard. When the land is developed, the billboard will be
removed.
Weihe recommended approval of the property division into two lots as
proposed by Hillcrest Development for lot adjacent to 3250 Spruce Street
subject to compliance with the recommendations of the City Planner and
the City Engineer.
Motion seconded by Rheaume.
Motion carried 5 - 0.
®UTDCIOIt The City Planner reported that the Council has asked that the Commission
ST®RAGI; look at the issue of existing outdoor storage allowances in the I-P District,
IN I-P noting that the outdoor storage at the Orius building just discussed has
I3IST32ICT been one of the City's concerns in this regard. The Planner reported that
outdoor storage becomes a maintenance and enforcemenC issue i'or the
_.____ . __.. _ _ Cit Screettina
y. ~ has niso been a problem, noting the difficulty i^ screening
outdoor storage at the Orius site given the height of the equipment and the
elevation of the freeway. The Planner reviewed his report daeed April 14,
'005 ~.vitieh outlines ~:~UP conditions for outdoor storage in the i-P
NIINUTI/S
PLANNING COMMISSION
APRII~,14, 2005
District. The Planner noted that in reviewing this issue, Che Commission
should provide input on outdoor storage issues related to the following:
1. Size of storage area;
2. Location of storage area, e.g.side yards or rear yards only,
etc.;
3. Height and visibility of storage;
4. Any other issues of concern.
The Planner noted that another option would be to eliminate outdoor
storage in the I-P District entirely.
Rheaume noted Chat if a property has a CUP for outdoor storage and that
property is sold, the new owner can continue the storage use. The Planner
agreed that a CUP tuns with the land. However, the use must be similar
and the use cannoC lapse for an extended period of time.
Rheaume noted Chat one problem with the Hil]cresC property is its
elevation from the freeway prevents the screening of outdoor storage from
view.
The Planner noted that the Council has placed a moratorium on additional
outdoor storage in the I-P District to allow for the study of this issue.
Therefore, if the Commission so desired, they would think about the issue
and be prepared to discuss it at the next meeting. The Commission agreed
and noted Chat it would like the full Commission present when this matter
is discussed. Weihe also indicated that she would like to look at the I-P
Districts in the City in preparation for the discussion.
Wojcik recommended that tabling action on an amendment Co Che Zoning
Code relative to the amount, location, and development standards for
outdoor storage in Che I-P DisCricC until the May Commission meeting.
Motion seconded by Weihe.
Motion carried 5 - 0.
C®MP PLAN The City Planner indicated that the Metropolitan Council will be
UPDATL+ requiring the update of cities' Comprehensive Plans in ?008. There have
been no update guidelines prepared as of yet, however. The Planner also
^oted that an Update of the Comp Plan and the City's Zoning and
Subdivision Ordinance is a X005 goat that was identified by the City
Council. 'ihe Planner anticipated that ehis project will begin over the next
couple of ;:ears once :specifics are uvailanle ti~om the Met Council. Tae
7-
MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL
AP12TL 27, 2005
DEVELOPMENT SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE
PERTINENT RECOMMENDATIONS OP THE CITY PLANNER AND
CITY ENGINEER, AND SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE
CITY'S PIPELINE SETBACK PROVISIONS OE THE SUBDIVISION
CODE
The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Keis.
Ayes (5) LaValle, Keis, Montour, Blesener, Allan.
Nays (0). Resolution declared adopted.
AMENDMENT Blesener noted that the Planning Commission has tabled action on the
TO ZONING issue outdoor storage in Che Industrial Park District until their May 12,
CODE - 2005 meeting.
OUTDOOR
STORAGE IN Mr. Blesener introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
I-P DISTRICT
RESOLUTION NO.2005-4-96 -TABLING CONSIDERATION OF AN
AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING CODE RELATIVE TO OUTDOOR
STORAGE IN THE INDUSTRIAL PARK (I-P) DISTRICT PENDING
A RECOMMENDATION PROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION
The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Allan.
Ayes (5) Blesener, Allan, Montour, Keis, LaValle.
Nays (0). Resolution declared adopted.
LITTLE Blesener reviewed staff's reporC which indicates that Che Little Canada
CANADA Recreation Association is interested in operating at the Little Canada
BINGO ~ Bingo Hall three days per week. He also noted that North Suburban
HALL - Youth Foundation and Lake Owasso are each interested in two days
GAMBLING per week. NSYF has further indicated that they are not interested in
ISSUES operating any of the day time sessions. It was noted that the Little Canada
Recreation Association will commence the licensing process, and would
hope to begin operating September ls`
Keis noted that he and Montour are members of LCRA, and asked
whether they should abstain from any formal action on LCRA's gambling
]icense. The City Attorney responded that when the formal action is
before the Council, Keis and Montour should abstain.
The Council discussed the matter and indicated no objection to a rotation
schedule that provided LCRA with three days per weep, Lake Owasso
with two days, and NSYF with two days. The Council was agreeable to
the three organizations working out a mutually agreeable schedule for the
day sessions.
~1
GL~ ~GG((P ~C~JC/l'deeG~C~
515 Little Canada Road, Little Canada, iiilN 55117-1600
(661) 766-4029 /FAX: (651) 766-4048
ww~~~. ci little-canacl a. n'in. u s
CITY OI' LITTLE CANADA
NOTICE Or PUBLIC HEARING
ZONING CODE AMENDMENT
PROPOSAL:
A request for an amendment to Che Zoning Code relative to temportuy signage.
MAS'Of~
r3i11 nlesener
COUNC,'ll:
Jim La Valle
Pick Montour
L4arbara e~Alla^
John Kets
ADMINIS'!'I2A'lOR
Joet F2. Hanson
PLANNING COMMISSION:
The Little Canada Planning Commission will be reviewing this matter at their regular meeting
scheduled for Thursday, May 12, 2005 meeting. The meeting begins at 7:30 p.m. and will be held in
the Council Chambers of the City Center located at 515 Little Canada Road in said City.
CITY COUNCIL:
Notice is hereby given that a Public Hearing will be held by the City Council to review this request at
their regular meeting to be held on Wednesday, May 25, 2005 at 7:30 p.m., or as soon thereafter as
parties may be heard, in the Council Chambers of the City Center located at 515 Little Canada Road in
said City.
All persons with reference to this matter will be heard during the Planning Commission meeting on
Thursday, May 12, 2005 and the City Council meeting on Wednesday, May 25, 2005.
Sign language interpreters for hearing-impaired persons are available for public hearings upon request.
The request for this service must be made at least 96 hours in advance. Please call to make the
necessary arrangements.
Joel R. Hanson
City Administrator
IYIAYOR
BiII Blesener
<;~ ~~
~G/GIBJ ~~GfJ'GCB~eZ
COl1NCIL
Jim La Valle
Pick Mmitour
Barbara .Allan
John Keis
515 Little Canada Road, LiC1'.le C~~ada, MN 55117-1600
(651) 76G-4029 /FAX: (651) 766-4048
www.cilitile-canada.mn.us
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Jessica Jagoe, Code Enforcement Officer
DATE: May 5, 2005
RE: Sign Ordinance
ADNIWISI7ZAT012
Joel R. 1-Temso^
Attached is the revised sign ordinance staff drafted based on surveys from surrounding cities, as
well as Council direction. Highlights of the changes are as follows:
Permitted Signs.
o Constrz~ction Signs -Change in size from 50 square feet to 64 square feet to
reflect actual practice.
o Real Estate Signs or Rental Signs -Change in the number of days a real estate or
rental sign can be displayed once the property has been sold or leased. We also
made a change in allowable sign square footage for nonresidential districts to
again reflect what we tend to see as the noi~rn.
o Advertising and Promotional Banners -Deleted section. Moved banners to
temporary signage that would require a permit.
o Garage Sale Signs -Added this section to allow for garage sale signage with
conditions to coincide with actual practice.
General Provisions -Temporary Signs
o Returned banners to the temporary sign section. Businesses will then be required
to pull a permit for displaying a banner and the banner will also count towards
their total number of allowable temporary signage days during a calendar year.
o More specific details on how and where the banner may be mounted as well as
maintenance for the duration of the permit.
1-I:VessicaJ\Codc Gnf'orcement\Correspondence\Code 9nf 3005\May Planning Commission Sign Memo.doc
903. GENERAL PROVISIONS
903.110. SIGNS.
B. Permitted and Prohibited Signs.
Permitted Signs. The following signs are allowed without apermit, but shall
comply with all other applicable provisions of this Ordinance:
Construction Signs. Such signs shall be confined to the site of the
construction, alteration, or repair, and shall be removed within two
(2) years of the date of issuance of the first building permit or when
the particular proj ect is completed, whichever is sooner as determined
by the City Building Official or his agent. One sign shall be
permitted for each major street the project abuts. No sign may
exceed rrni..~ sixty-four (64) square feet.
g. Real Estate Sale or Rental Signs.
(1) On-site Signs. Signs must be removed within ~ '-^~'
seven 7 days after sale or rental of property. Signs may not
measure more than €eur-(4) six 6 square feet in Residential
Districts-,.,°..... },..,, „ «,..... +..,°.~ °~~„
041°°~.~~--di-st===~~ Sins for all nonresidential zoning districts
shall not exceed a ratio of one square foot of sign area for•
each 1,000 square feet of lot area uo to a maximum of sixth
four (64) square feet. There shall be only one (1) sign per
premise. Corner properties, however, may contain two (2)
signs, one (1) per frontage.
»..... ,.......~.,., ..................~..... ,,,..~.~~..u.. ~..,,, irb .o~i c~-~
/R lx7 R 1 B 7 T2 Z D A 4 T T 1 T 7 T D\ .....7 7 F 7
> o e > > , e
'°1 ., a1.:., N. DT Tll 7' L, 711. it A
nFC,..°A4.,}h°1,..;1A:.... .,.. ,~~,,,...t„A ,. :nt:.. ,. A„v~vl
"rry"-i6k} S}gj}. ~'~}~ 1~]"}7}Ze'r-iS[TSt~xuriiiai~~rica~ii--aii
r~,m ,F, vA. .1. _ + ..~h
,•vc-coii
Garage Sale Signs.
Garage sales signs are allowed in residential zoning districtsprovided
permission from the property owner has been obtained. These signs
may not be located within the public right-of--way. Signs a to four
square feet per side are allowed and no more than four (4) in number.
The signs may be erected one (1) dayprior to the sale only, and must
be removed at the end of the sale. Said signs shall be maintained in
an aesthetically pleasing manner for the duration that theme
displayed. Any sign not complying with these provisions will be
removed without notice.
C. General Provisions.
4. a.l. Temporary use ofportable signs, banners ~~e°~~~^ ~''^ ~~^^~°~^~•^
^°~, pennants, window signs in excess of that established below,
and similar devices shall require a permit pursuant to Section
903.110.F. of this ordinance. In the case of single tenant buildings, a
permit shall not be issued for more than thirty (30) days nor shall a
permit be issued within thirty (30) days from the termination date of
a prior perniit. In no case shall permits exceed three (3) in a calendar
year or a total of sixty (60) days in a calendar year. In the case of
multi-tenant properties, a permit shall not be issued for more than
thirty (30) days. In no case shall permits exceed three (3) in a
calendar year per tenant, or a total of sixty (60) days in a calendar
year per tenant. Further, no more than two (2) tenants, or 50% of the
tenants at one time, may possess temporary sign permits at the same
time. If spotlights are used in conjunction with temporary signs, such
lights shall not be operated during more than five (5) days in
conjunction with any single permit and shall be placed in such a
manner as to not constitute a traffic hazard. Temporary signs shall be
removed from display immediately upon lapse ofpermit. Said signs
shall be at least five (5) feet from the property line. It is hereby noted
that sign permits for multiple tenant buildings may not be reallocated
from one tenant to another to increase the allowable number of signs
in any calendar year.
Except as expressly allowed in Section 903.110.C.4.c. below, no
temporary sign shall exceed thirty-two (32) square feet in area nor six (6)
feet in height, as measured from the ground over which the sign is
displayed with the exception ofbanners that may be mounted up to or no
higher than the peek of the roof. ~~~~~~°~° -~ ~~',~ ••~ «,. F .«, ism ,.
°~~Banners used as temporary suns shall only be allowed to
advertise a specific promotional event with a defined time period. They
may not be used for Qeneral advertising of a business name or product.
Said banners and pennants shall be maintained in an aesthetically
pleasing manner for the duration of the permit and shall be free of tears,
frayin2, or fading when viewed from the public right-of--way. Banners
must be affixed to the building or mormted between the poles of an
existing, double post pylon sign securely affixed by all four corners. In
the case of pennants, they rnust also be affixed to the buildin>7 or a pylon
si~rr and secured by both ends. Banners and pennants may not encroach
into the public right of wad
•rv~_]
0
~~
N
O
N
O
O
O
O
N
N
C
Q
0
O
0
O
N
W
d'
Cr
N
O
O
0
0
O
d
U
G
O
U
m
C
9
0
0
N
C
O
N
C
m
N
N
N
~~
~N
~~
`~
W
^^J\
W
W
v
N
U
N
C
N
L_
N
N
N a
C C
m N
y O
= ~
p 2
d ~
~ E
U
d d
C
O N
d v ~ ~
Q N
0 0 ~ (°O
m Z m m '
man'" v
m v o v
a
v
rn c ~ E ~
C y C ~
N
~p O N O
C O O ?
O G
Q N E p W
~ ~ Z ~ O
O._ N O
c o ui 'c c
o m ~ '~ N
a v m ~ o
v O ~ N
°'~E o ~c aci
w v rn N E
~ 2 CN y `o
E i. £ ~ a
m ~ v `o m
~ `o ~
v ° E
N
~ m c a~
N O N "' N
~ E m ~ o
m °'~`° E
N v > m
v ~ °_ q
U~ N N L .Ci
a °-5 °-'
N `~ N
L O U N C
_ ~ N
.~ O d C ~
m ~. N
N C C N
C ~ C O) ~
p v N'Ui r
- C -
C'~ N C
O t] E E U
N N Y p T
N VNl J •r% IA
0) N
p ~ N
p~ r m
v v v c
O N
1 ~ O to
S ~ ~ N O
(~ % ~ LL [Y
MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL
MARCH 9, 2005
The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Allan.
Ayes (4) Montour, Allan, Keis, LaValle.
Nays (0). Resolution declared adopted.
BANNERS Council reviewed City staff's report relative to Sign Ordinance
modifications relating to banners. LaValle reviewed the comments
submitted by Mayor Blesener on this issue indicating support for the
options of putting banners under the temporary sign ordinance or
generating a banner specific ordinance. Banners should be for time-
related promotions only and be required to come down immediately after a
promotion is over. Banners should be premise specific, and display time
and number per year should be similar to what is provided for in the
temporary sign ordinance. Blesener's correspondence noted that staff's
survey shows that 32 square feet in size appears to be the most commonly
accepted size, and that he would support 32 square feeC or slightly larger.
Allan stated that she felt banners should be regulated as temporary signs
and subject to permit fees to cover the cost of policing and enforcing the
ordinance. LaValle indicated that if banners are regulated, a deposit
should be required to ensure that banners are removed in a timely manner
similar to the system used for temporary signs. LaValle suggested that the
deposit did not need to be as high for banners as for temporary signs,
however.
Keis asked if classifying banners as temporary signs would inhibit the
ability of businesses to advertise. He also asked about compliance with
the City's temporary sign ordinance. The City Administrator indicated
that businesses generally comply with the City's temporary sign
ordinance. The number of temporary sign permits has been reduced,
however, since banners were allowed as permitted signs in 2003.
Keis agreed that banners should be regulated under either Che temporary
sign ordinance or under a separate banner ordinance. Allan again
suggested that banners be addressed as a temporary sign. The City
Administrator noted that prior to 2003, banners were considered a
temporary sign.
Keis asked about the impact on multi-tenant buildings. Allan noted that
the temporary sign ordinance provides for equitable temporary signage for
businesses that are located in multi-tenant properties. The City
Administrator noted that there had been some inequities in the ordinance,
but an amendment was recently adopted which corrected this situation.
The City Administrator suggested that City staff put together a proposal
for including banners as temporary signage for the Council's
MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL
MARCH 9, 2005
ASSESSMENT
REAPPOR-
TIONMENT -
MARKET
SQUARE
TOWN OI'P'ICES
consideration. He noted that any changes would require an ordinance
amendment which would be presented to the Planning Commission for a
recommendation and then to the Council.
LaValle agreed. He also suggested thaC letters be sent to property owners
and business owners reminding them that window signage is limited to
33°Io of the window space. LaValle noted that there are some businesses
in town which are filling up window space with signage. LaValle felt this
was a public safety issue.
LaValle suggested that the deposit for a banner should be set at $100
rather than the $200 deposit required for other temporary signage.
Montour pointed out that several neighboring cities limit the size of
banners to no larger than 32 square feet. Montour also noted that
Shoreview does not allow a business to have temporary signage if they
have permanent signage that has a changeable message board.
Keis suggested that some businesses would want both the changeable
message board and temporary signage.
It was the consensus of the Council that City staff should prepare a
recommendation for the Council's review prior to the matter going
through the formal public hearing process.
The City Administrator reviewed a proposed reapportionment
of the assessment for the Middle Street improvement among the Market
Square Town Office units.
Mr. Montour introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 2005-3-h6 -APPROVING THE ASSESSMENT
REAPPORTIONMENT FOR PROPERTY DIVISION DGOh9784,
MARKET SQUARE TOWN OFFICES AS RECOMMENDED BY CITY
STAFF
The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Allan.
Ayes (4) Montour, Allan, Keis, LaValle.
Nays (0). Resolution declared adopted.
EDGERTON The City Administrator reported that work on the Edgerton Bridge
BRIDGE decking will begin soon as well as work on the bridge approach and
Edgerton/County Road D improvements. It is expected that this work will
be completed by the end of July. The Administrator reported that there is
MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL
MARCH 23, 2005
roads are designated as on street paths, therefore, used by both pedestrians
and drivers.
Allan stated that she did not feel it was necessary to post both sides of a
street as no parking. Montour agreed, but felt that in order to give proper
consideration to residents along both sides of the sheet their input should
be sought.
BANNERS The Council reviewed the proposed amendment to the temporary sign
ordinance relating to banners as was discussed at its last meeting.
LaValle indicated concern for banners that are being utilized by local bar
owners to promoting their sponsorship of ball teams. He felt these
banners would need to be up longer than the 30 day period provided in the
proposed ordinance. Blesener noted that some of the bars sponsor teams
all year round.
LaValle stated that he felt some businesses were using banners as a means
to have additional signage year round. He indicated that by classifying
banners as temporary signs, his intent was not to hurt business or curtail
promotions, but provide for some control
Montour noted that since banners were allowed as permitted signs, there
are so many banners up in the City that a person no longer even sees them.
Montour indicated that he, too, was concezned about the year round usage
of banners as additional signage for a business and did not think they
should be used for this propose.
Allan noted the Maz•ket Square Town Offices and the impact that the use
of banners by individual tenants would have on this building.
Blesener and Allan felt that banners should be a temporary sign. Montour
was concerned about the City resources that would be used in enforcing
this change. The City Administrator felt the initial enforcement effort
would be great, but after that point, enforcement should be manageable.
The Council discussed how the ordinance could be worded to allow liquor
establishments to use banners to advertisement for team sponsorship in a
reasonable manner. LaValle suggested that he put some ideas together
and work with the City Administrator on this wording.
Mr. LaValle introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
10
MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL
MARCH 23, 2005
RESOLUTION NO. 2005-3-73 -TABLING ACTION ON THE ISS UE
OF BANNERS AS TEMPORARY SIGNAGE UNTIL THE APRIL 73,
2005 COUNCIL MEETING
The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Allan.
Ayes (5) LaValle, Allan, Montour, Keis, Blesener.
Nays (0). Resolution declared adopted.
GAS Mr. Montour introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
DISPENSING
& TOBACCO RESOLUTION NO. 2005-3-74 -APPROVING THE TRANSFER
LICENSES - TO GAS DISPENSING LICENSE AND APPROVAL OF A
PETRO MARKET TOBACCO LICENSE FOR IIAMID GHOMI, DBA PETRO MARKET
AT 2652 RICE STREET PENDING RECEIPT OF A SATISFACTORY
SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT BACKGROUND CHECK
The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Keis.
Ayes (5) Montour, Keis, Blesener, LaValle, Allan.
Nays (0). Resolution declared adopted.
2005 Mr. Blesener introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
IMPROVE-
MENTS RESOLUTION NO. 2005-3-75 -APPROVING PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY ENGINEER TO
ADVERTISF. FOR BIDS FOR TIIE 2005 IMPROVEMENTS
The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by LaValle.
Ayes (5) Blesener, LaValle, Keis, Allan, Montour.
Nays (0). Resolution declared adopted.
ADJOURN Mr. LaValle introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION N0.2005-3-76 -ADJOURNING
The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Allan.
Ayes (5) LaValle, Allan, Montour, Keis, Blesener.
Nays (0). Resolution declared adopted.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:50 p.m.
William Blesener, Mayor
Attest:
Joel R. Hanson, City Administrator
11
MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL
APRIL 13, 2005
SESSION
RESOLUTION NO. 200,5-4-79 -CALLING FOR A CL OSED SESSION
FOLLOWING THE REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING TO DISCUSS
DAYSPRING DEVELOPMENT PENDING LITIGATION
The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Keis.
Ayes (4) LaValle, Keis, Blesener, Allan.
Nays (0). Resolution declared adopted.
BIDS FOR The City Engineer requested that the bid opening for the 2005
2005 Improvements are delayed until Friday, April 15, 2005 to ensure MN
IMPROVEMENTS DOT approval and MSA project status of these improvements prior to bid
opening. The City Administrator recommended that a special meeting of
the Council be scheduled for early next week to award the bid.
Mr. Blesener introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 2005-4-79 -DELAYING BID OPENING FOR
2005 IMPROVEMENTS UNTIL FRIDAY, APRIL I5, 2005 AND
CALLING FOR A SPECIAL MEETING FOR MONDAY, APRIL 78,
2005, AT 5:00 P.M. TO AWARD THE BID FOR 2005
IMPROVEMENTS AS REQUESTED BY TIIE CITY ENGINEER AND
CITY ADMINISTRATOR
The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by LaValle.
Ayes (4) Blesener, LaValle, Allan, Keis.
Nays (0). Resolution declared adopted.
SIGN The Council reviewed the staff report dated Apri17, 2005 related to
ORDINANCE banners as temporary signs. The report highlights two proposals
RELATED relative to this issue, one would classify banners consistent with all
TO BANNER other temporary signs and the other would classify banners as temporary
signs except for banners that would be used by liquor establishments to
advertise for team sponsorship. Those banners would be permitted signs.
City staff recommended the classification of all banners as temporary
signs.
LaValle indicated that he had recommended that liquor establishments be
allowed to utilize banners to advertise for sports Ceam sponsorship as
permitted signage or, if temporary signage, for longer periods of time than
the typical temporary sign. LaValle felt this ability would be of benefit to
the liquor businesses as well as sports teams. Blesener indicated that he,
too, wanted to provide some additional assistance in this area; however,
after talking to one of the liquor business owners in town, feels that the
MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL
APRIL 13, 2005
use of pylon sign reader boards would be appropriate for this advertising.
This business owner had indicated that he supported whatever change was
necessary Co help clean up signage. He pointed out that banners are
usually obtained by businesses from distributors at no cost. The banner
typically has a product logo on it in addition to whatever message is being
displayed.
Allan noted that of the four liquor businesses in Little Canada that would
be advertising for team sponsorship, three have pylon signs with reader
boards. The only one that does not is Gordies', and Allan noted that this
business has three pylon signs. Allan suggested that the face of one of
these signs be changed to a reader board.
LaValle indicated that the cost of constructing a new pylon sign at
Gordies' would be substantial. Allan again suggested that the face of one
of the pylons be changed to a reader board, and suggested that would be
less expensive than constructing a totally new pylon.
Keis agreed, and stated that he did not want to have an ordinance that
established special provisions for one class of business.
Mr. Blesener introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 2005-4-80 -CALLING FOR A PUBLIC
HEARING TOR WEDNESDAY, MAY 25, 2005 AT 7:30 P.M. TO
CONSIDER AMENDING THE ZONING CODE RELATIVE TO THE
CLASSIFICATION OF ALL BANNER SIGNS AS TEMPORARY
SIGNS AS RECOMMENDED BY CITY STAFF
The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Allan.
Ayes (3) Blesener, Allan, Keis.
Nays (1) LaValle. Resolution declared adopted.
RAMSEY The City Administrator reviewed his report dated March 29, 2005
COUNTY recommending Little Canada's participation in the Ramsey County GIS
GIS USERS Users Group. The Administrator reported that this is a central site that
GROUP has been developed using county data for property records, aerial surveys,
and other data. The site has been made available to all local governments
within the County. This system would replace the IRIS system that the
City currently subscribes to. The Administrator noted that the GIS system
is more functional than IRIS for items such as aerial parcel maps,
generation of mailing lists for public hearings, and mapping overlays. A
future benefit of this system will be the inclusion of two-Foot contour
aerial surveys within the database. Cost to participate includes none-time
$500 fee as well as a $938 annual fee.
4