Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-11-2018 Planning Commission Packet AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION THURSDAY, JANUARY 11, 2018 7:30 p.m. AMENDED 1-10-2018 CALL TO ORDER – 7:30 P.M. Roll Call Chair for 2018 – Bill Buesing appointed by the City Council Election of Vice Chair Approval of Minutes – December 14, 2017 PLANNING CASES: 1. Planned Unit Development Permit Amendment for Outdoor Storage and Allow Outdoor Storage in Front Yard Area Applicant: Meyer Companies Address: 3151 Country Drive OTHER BUSINESS 2. Land Use Training ADJOURN 515 Little Canada Road, Little Canada, MN 55117-1600 (651) 766-4029 / FAX: (651) 766-4048 www.ci.little-canada.mn.us MAYOR John Keis COUNCIL Rick Montour Michael McGraw Tom Fischer Christian Torkelson ADMINISTRATOR Joel R. Hanson CITY OF LITTLE CANADA NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AMENDMENT PROPOSAL: A request for approval of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Permit Amendment to allow for outdoor storage consisting generally of contractor equipment and materials as an accessory use. The request includes consideration of approval for outdoor storage to be located in the front yard of the property. The property in question is located at 3151 Country Drive and zoned PUD, Planned Unit Development. APPLICANT PROPERTY OWNER Meyer Companies, Inc. Prairie Capital, Inc. 3151 Country Drive 881 Lincoln Avenue Little Canada, MN 55117 St. Paul, MN 55105 PROPERTY LOCATION: 3151 Country Drive, Little Canada, MN 55113 PLANNING COMMISSION: The Little Canada Planning Commission will be reviewing this matter at its regular meeting scheduled for Thursday, December 14, 2017. The meeting begins at 7:30pm 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, December 20, 2017 at 7:30pm, 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, December 14, 2017 and the City Council meeting on Wednesday, December 20, 2017. For any questions, please contact Jessica Jagoe, Associate Planner at 651-766-4046 or jessica.jagoe@littlecanadamn.org STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission Members FROM: Jessica Jagoe, Planning Associate DATE: January 10, 2018 RE: 3151 Country Drive – PUD Amendment & Request for Outdoor Storage Lee Meyer, Owner of Meyer Companies, Inc. aka Pete’s Water and Sewer has submitted a revised site plan based on staff’s comments from our December 7, 2017 report. In addition, city staff has had two meetings with Mr. Meyer or Wayne Manders, COO for Pete’s Water and Sewer on the site layout and screening that he is proposing. Mr. Meyer has reduced the outdoor storage area proposed and is no longer seeking approval to encroach into the required front yard setback. The revised site plan shows the proposed outdoor storage area in front of the front building line of both Buildings 1 and 2 up to that 40 foot front yard setback line. As previously mentioned, city staff believes that the lack of rear yard on the property does create a basis for varying from our code standard on location of outdoor storage. Additionally, applying this variation of the code is consistent with the handling of the properties along the north side of Ryan Drive in the Ryan Industrial Park. With that, the city has discretion in determining what’s reasonable and still applying the intention of the PUD District in finding the best and highest quality use of the site. A copy of the survey for 3151 Country Drive was used in developing the revised site plan #12. The revised plan is actually seeking approval for less outdoor storage than what was originally proposed based on some of the reconfiguring Mr. Meyer needed to do with the layout of the outdoor storage areas. The new plan shows a request for up to 13,300 square feet of outdoor storage on the site. The main outdoor storage area will be 11,900 square feet. The revised plan shows outdoor storage occurring in front of both buildings. The principal building (west building) under the prior ownership was configured for multiple tenants. Each rental space had a separate main entrance door and overhead garage door. Mr. Meyer has indicated his intention is to remodel the interior space in the principal building for office space to accommodate 7-10 employees and his business will be the sole occupant of the property. He will be eliminating the multiple entrances and have one designated entrance to the office area for customers and employees. There will still be two service doors on each side of the west building, but those will be for employees gaining access into the outdoor storage areas and will not be an entrance for customers. The west building is considered the principal building for this site and city staff believes the visibility and appearance of that should be maintained. In similar variances (209 and 221 Ryan Drive), the City has granted approval to encroach past the front line of the building, but the outdoor storage was not allowed in front of the principal building. This part of the request would be inconsistent with our handling of variances to allow for outdoor storage in the front yard. The city code states that outdoor storage may not encroach past the front line of the building. When consideration is being given to deviate from that regulation, there is not a standard to say how much or how far that variation shall go. The degree of variation from the code needs to be determined by judgement when the variance is granted taking into account the use is still in harmony with the general purpose and intent of our ordinances and consistent in how it’s applied. As a result, Mr. Meyer is seeking to be allowed outdoor storage in front of the building because he feels he is still maintaining the visibility of having a prominent entrance to the building and altering the other two side doors as employee service doors only. Based on being consistent with our handling of the two similar variance requests within Ryan Industrial Park, city staff would recommend that no outdoor storage be located in front of the principal building (west building). This would also require Mr. Meyer to reduce the small sliver of outdoor storage on the western edge of the property since that outdoor storage area proposed also encroaches in front of the entrance door to the building. Staff believes that outdoor storage in front of the East Storage Building is reasonable as this is an accessory building. The Planning Commission does have the flexibility in recommending approval of Mr. Meyer’s request as presented if you feel the threshold for varying from our code has been met because the site plan submitted is within reason and intent of the PUD District given the practical difficulty that exists with the limited rear yard area. In addition to reconfiguring the layout of the site, Mr. Meyer has also changed how the outdoor storage areas will be screened. The survey has confirmed that the existing chain link fence on the south side of the property is located within the City’s right-of-way. As a result, Mr. Meyer is now proposing to replace all of the existing fencing with a new, solid, six-foot high wood fence in the front yard and eight foot high in the side and rear yard. Mr. Meyer is aware that the new fence will need to be located entirely on his property. One suggestion staff had was to consider installing the wood fence around the designated outdoor storage areas as a means to control those spaces from encroaching past the approved storage areas. Mr. Meyer feels that installing the fence in that manner would hinder his maneuverability of equipment in and out of those designated areas. As a solution, Mr. Meyer has proposed installing temporary curb stops (spaced 10 feet apart) around those designated areas as a means to better delineate the storage area. With regard to the fencing, the proposed heights do comply with city ordinances. However, within the required front yard (along Ryan Drive) the material allowed by City Code 903.020.F.8.c would be either chain link or woven wire to allow maximum visibility. This section of our Fence ordinance does have a provision to allow for a Special Purpose Fence by Conditional Use Permit if it is determined that construction, height, or length should differ from this requirement. With that, the applicant is requesting approval of a CUP to allow up to a six foot high solid wood fence along Ryan Drive as proposed. 903.020.9. Special Purpose Fences. a. Fences for special purposes and fences differing in construction, height or length may be permitted in any district in the City by issuance of a conditional use permit, except as provided for in Section 903.020.F.9.b. of this Ordinance. Lastly, Mr. Meyer is proposing to pave, stripe, and install curbing in the designated parking and drive aisle areas. The two designated outdoor storage areas on the site will be either Class V or recycled material. In the I-1 District CUP regulations for Outdoor Storage 914.040.G.11 it states that “the storage area shall be paved with asphalt, concrete, or other material approved by the City Council”. This form of other material in the outdoor storage areas would be consistent with what we’ve permitted in the Ryan Industrial Park. Therefore, city staff recommends approval of allowing Class V or recycled material within the approved designated outdoor storage areas only. Recommendation The applicant has taken into consideration a number of the concerns staff noted in the first report and applied many of our suggestions throughout this revision process. City staff acknowledges the limited rear yard as a basis for approving outdoor storage to encroach into the front yard, but we do feel the variation of code is inconsistent with the intent of the PUD District and neighboring properties to allow outdoor storage in front of the principal building. As a result, Planning Staff is recommending approval of the PUD Amendment at 3151 Country Drive to allow outdoor storage as permitted in 914.040, I-1-Light Industrial and to approve the paving of the property as presented with the site plan being modified so that no outdoor storage occurs in front of the principal building. Based on the determination that:  The property has a practical difficulty of complying with the city codes for location of the outdoor storage area due to the lack of rear yard abutting the railroad property.  The site plan shall be modified because it is inconsistent with the neighboring properties to allow outdoor storage to be located in front of the principal building. In addition, Planning Staff is recommending approval of a Conditional Use Permit at 3151 Country Drive to allow a six foot high solid wood fence in the front yard as shown on Site Plan Survey #12. Note - So the Planning Commission is aware, city staff did contact Mr. Meyer today about his illegal occupancy of the property. Occupancy of the property, existence of outdoor storage, location of his outdoor storage, and lack of screening is in violation of our ordinances. This plan was never discussed or approved by staff. 18407 N: \ P r o j e c t s \ 1 7 1 5 4 \ 1 7 1 5 4 P D F . d w g , 9 / 8 / 2 0 1 7 1 : 4 5 : 5 2 P M Option 12 STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission Members FROM: Jessica Jagoe, Associate Planner DATE: December 7, 2017 RE: PUD Amendment and Variance Request for Outdoor Storage at 3151 Country Drive Lee Meyer, Owner of Meyer Companies, Inc. aka Pete’s Water and Sewer is seeking approval of a PUD Amendment at 3151 Country Drive to allow for outdoor storage consisting generally of contractor equipment and materials as an accessory use. Additionally Mr. Meyer’s request includes consideration of approval for outdoor storage to be located in the required front yard of the property. Mr. Meyer does have a signed purchase agreement with Mr. Hendrie Grant, Property Owner of 3151 Country Drive. The anticipated closing date is on or before February 14, 2019. However, it is noted in the application materials that Pete’s Water and Sewer would occupy the property once City approvals have been granted. The subject parcel is zoned Planned Unit Development (PUD) and is located within the Ryan Industrial Park. This property and 221 Ryan Drive (the property directly west) are the only two properties within the Park that have this zoning designation. This is due to their proximity to Country Drive. The City’s Comprehensive Plan guides the Country Drive corridor towards redevelopment for a mixture of compatible land uses (i.e. commercial and industrial). The proposed contractor shop would be consistent with the surrounding properties which are dominated by Industrial uses under I-1, Light Industrial, I-P, Industrial Park, and PUD zoning designations. The applicant is a sewer and water utility construction company with 35 employees (7 in the office and 28 in the field). The contractor use of the property would not change significantly from the prior approvals which allowed for a roofing contractor with accessory outdoor storage of roofing equipment and materials. It is the specificity in “roofing” use that has led to the need for an amendment. Currently, Mr. Meyer has the office and field employees working out of two different locations. His intention with this property is to combine both of these functions and to operate out of one location. Since this property is zoned PUD, Mr. Meyer has indicated he plans to complete several upgrades to the property which include: painting the buildings, new signage, landscaping improvements, installation of a new fence with gates and interior remodel of the principal building for office space. With regards to the outdoor storage, the applicant has provided three scenarios for how the outdoor storage could be configured on the site. Mr. Meyer is seeking to allow similar standards as provided for in the I-1, Light Industrial zoning district. With the exception that under the PUD zoning, Mr. Meyer is requesting to vary from code standards to allow outdoor storage in the required front yard. Outdoor Storage Mr. Meyer is requesting that they be allowed a contractor shop with accessory outdoor storage that is consistent with the surrounding I-1 properties. The PUD Amendment would permit outdoor storage as an accessory use subject to the conditions of 914.040.G, I-1, Light Industrial Conditional Use Permit for Outdoor Storage (staff comments in italics) - G.Open and Outdoor Storage as an accessory use, provided that: 1. The activity of outdoor storage shall require a separate business license issued by the City of Little Canada. The applicant will be responsible for obtaining said license upon approval. Mr. Hendrie Grant, Property Owner, has applied for an outdoor storage license, but the City has not issued said license because the property is vacant. 2. The storage area in question occupies an area no greater than sixty (60) percent of the gross square footage of the subject parcel. Staff has reviewed all three site plans and the square footages shown by type of storage would add up to less than the 60% allowed (proposed is between 19,600 square feet and 22,000 square feet). It should be noted that on the option sheets under key #9, the applicant indicates 32,700 square feet of outdoor storage to be used. This amount exceeds the maximum allowed for the site which would be 26,398 square feet. This discrepancy was brought to the attention of the realtor for Mr. Meyer. City staff was told that new site plans would be submitted, but staff has not yet received those. It is believed that the key is incorrect. However, the applicant should clarify and submitted an updated site plan as soon as possible since this is a critical piece in our review. Planning staff would not recommend approval for an outdoor storage area in excess of 60%. 3. The storage area shall not occupy any portion of the yard between the front building line and the adjoining public street, or the side building line and public street on a corner lot. This provision is not unique to the I-1 zoning district (in fact all of the zoning districts where outdoor storage is allowed, storage is required to be behind the front building line). Within the PUD zoning district, the City does have the flexibility to review the site in order to achieve the highest quality product and best possible use of the site. The allowance of outdoor storage in front of the building line is consistent with the properties at 221 and 209 Ryan Drive (properties directly west of the applicant’s site and on north side of Ryan Drive). Both of these properties have been granted a Variance to allow a designated area in front of the building up to the required front yard (40 foot setback from property line) because of the lack of rear yard with these parcels abutting the railroad. In both variances, outdoor storage was not allowed across the entire front of the property along Ryan Drive, but rather only in the side yards (up to that 40 ft. setback). This is a corner parcel with frontage on both Country Drive and Ryan Drive. The setbacks in the I-1 Zoning District are: 1. Front Yards: Not less than forty (40) feet. 2.Side Yards: a. Not less than fifteen (15) feet on any one side, nor less than forty (40) feet on the side yard abutting a street. In Options #1 and #2, the applicant does not indicate a distance from Country Drive to the outdoor storage area, but using the scale shown it is estimated to be setback 60 feet. The proposed location for outdoor storage along Ryan Drive is directly abutting the property line for the entire length of the parcel. This south side of the property would also be subject to the 40 foot setback requirement using the I-1, Light Industrial setbacks. As noted above, in the other Variance approvals the properties were still required to adhere to setbacks from the street. In Option #3, the outdoor storage on Ryan Drive using the scale provided does appear to be setback 20 feet for most of the storage. However, there is a section of pipe racking and storage on the western edge that is shown to directly abut Ryan Drive. None of the three site plans comply with our code requirements for location of outdoor storage and are inconsistent with our handling of variance situations along this stretch. Lastly, city staff did request that the site plans show distance/measurements of proposed storage areas, drive aisle widths, and setback distances proposed. This was not reflected on the site plans submitted. It should be brought to your attention that the Q3, Quality Contracting property at 3066 Spruce Street (corner Spruce Street and South Owasso Blvd) also within the Ryan Industrial Park has outdoor storage that directly abuts the property line along South Owasso and along Spruce Street. This is a corner parcel that has legal non-conforming outdoor storage from the prior zoning and user (i.e. Frattalone Excavating). Frattalone Excavating was issued a Conditional Use Permit for outdoor storage in 1983 and this parcel was rezoned in 1989 (combination I-P and I-1). The excavating operation with accessory outdoor storage of equipment and materials was allowed as a continuation of use when Q3 purchased the site. This parcel is not a true comparable when considering approvals that have been granted in the area and criteria used today. Planning staff does find that the lack of rear yard on the property with the proximity to the railroad does create a practical difficulty in establishing outdoor storage in a manner that would comply and this condition is unique to this parcel and not created by the land owner. It is reasonable and consistent with the neighboring properties to approve outdoor storage that would encroach in front of the front building line. However, Planning Staff does not recommend approval of outdoor storage within the required 40 foot setback as shown on all three site plans or along the entire length of Ryan Drive. It is feasible for the outdoor storage to be configured in a manner that encroaches in front of the building line, complies with the minimum 20 foot drive aisle width, and setback requirements from the abutting streets (40 feet). As submitted, the outdoor storage directly abutting the property line is not consistent with the intent of the PUD zoning district by allowing outdoor storage to be expanded beyond the limitations of the code. Lastly, by allowing the outdoor storage to abut the property line this makes the equipment and/or materials more visible from the right-of-way and a more prominent use of the property. It is staff’s determination that this is not achieving a higher quality standard for the PUD District. 4. The storage is utilized solely by those tenants of the principal building in an amount proportionate to each tenant’s occupancy of said principal building. The applicant does not indicate any other tenants of the building. 5. The outdoor storage of equipment or materials, as defined by this Ordinance, must be capable of moving under its own power, stored on a trailer, stored within weather-proof containers, or other storage arrangements as approved by the City Council. Storage of any material directly on the ground when the dimensions of such item are less than three (3) feet in width, length, and height, shall be prohibited wherever the City Council determines that reasonable alternatives exist consistent with this section. Equipment and materials, if the application is approved, will be subject to the above provision and inspected annually during license renewal. The applicant indicates they are including a list of equipment, but this was not included in their submittal paperwork. 6. When storage or shipping containers are utilized, the following regulations shall apply: a.Containers shall be those manufactured expressly for the purpose of storing and/or shipping materials. b. No container, for the purpose of this ordinance, shall be greater than forty (40) feet in length, eight (8) feet in width, or eight and one half (8.5) feet in height. c.No more than one (1) such container may be allowed for each seven thousand five hundred (7,500) square feet of lot area. d. Containers shall not be stacked or arranged to exceed the eight and one-half (8.5) foot height. e.Containers shall be painted to match or be complementary in color to the principal building, and shall be maintained to avoid rusting or other visible deterioration of the container. f.There shall be no storage of hazardous materials, as defined by the zoning ordinance Section 902 of this Ordinance, within any such container. The applicant does not indicate use of storage or shipping containers in the proposed outdoor storage. 7. Outdoor storage areas must be kept in an orderly condition, permitting vehicular access to all materials or equipment. Lanes at least twenty (20) feet in width shall be required to meet this standard. No portion of the outdoor storage shall be more than fifty (50) feet from any access lane or other drive aisle, nor shall it block access to hydrants, fire sprinklers, or other fire- fighting equipment. Except for construction equipment which is stored or parked in its most compact condition, outdoor storage may not exceed eight (8) feet in height as measured from the ground on which it is located. The applicant does not designate the width of the drive lanes shown on any of the site plans submitted. Option #1 looks to have maintained the 20 foot drive aisle and option #2 appears close using the scale provided. Option #3 does not meet this standard and shows an estimate 10 feet between the outdoor storage area and the property line to the south at the narrowest point. The applicant does not provide a height for the outdoor storage proposed. However, they do indicate that the largest piece of equipment does not exceed 12 feet (that should be in its most compact form as required by code). The fence height proposed is eight (8) feet. Within section 903.020.F.8.c it states that “Fences erected within the required front yard area shall not exceed six (6) feet in height and shall be of a chain link or woven wire construction which affords maximum visibility. Fences on corner lots shall provide a visibility triangle meeting the thirty (30) feet dimensional requirements of Section 903.020.H of this Ordinance.” The applicant is proposing a solid eight (8) foot high steel fence along Ryan Drive (this distance is estimated to be 475 feet) which would be in the required front yard given this a corner property. Therefore, a Special Purpose Fence Conditional Use Permit would be required to vary from height and opacity in order for this to be permitted. 903.020.F.9. Special Purpose Fences. - a. Fences for special purposes and fences differing in construction, height or length may be permitted in any district in the City by issuance of a conditional use permit, except as provided for in Section 903.020.F.9.b. of this Ordinance. It is staff’s determination that a variation of the code to allow for a solid steel eight (8) foot high fence running the length of the property along Ryan Drive is not meeting the standards of the PUD District for achieving a higher quality product or design. In addition, it is inconsistent with variances approved that have required a chain link fence with landscaping to provide for screening. 8. The storage area shall be fenced and fully screened from adjoining non-industrial property, park and trail areas, and public right of way. Where properly fenced and screened, outdoor storage may encroach into the required side or rear yard setback area. Gates may be excluded from this screening requirement as provided for in Section 903.020.O.6. The applicant is proposing a solid steel fence with sliding gates. It is not indicated on the plans if the gates will be of the same material. 9. Screening shall consist of masonry walls or fencing constructed of wood or vinyl, as well as landscaping. Metal fencing may be used where landscaping provides a complete year-round screen and is irrigated to ensure survivability in compliance with Section 903.020.F (Fences) of this Ordinance. This is the requirement for I-1, Light Industrial. However, 903.020.G.3 for Required Screening states “The screening required herein in all zoning districts shall consist of a solid fence or wall constructed from masonry, brick, wood and/or steel. A chain link fence with slats does not constitute an acceptable screen or qualify as a solid fence”. With the PUD zoning, the applicant would satisfy the screening requirement with steel fencing as proposed. However, consideration should be given to staff’s comment above in #7. 10.Waste or recyclable material shall be contained in a refuse container. All such containers shall be stored within a screened enclosure within the rear yard of the property. The applicant does not designate the refuse container locations on the site plans. This should be updated for staff review. There may be a location other than in the rear yard to be considered. It would be Staff’s recommendation that the containers be located in a screened enclosure or one of the designate storage locations which would already have screening from the right-of-way. 11. The storage area shall be paved with asphalt, concrete, or other material approved by the City Council. The property is a combination of asphalt and Class V. The storage areas proposed would be on either material. 12. The storage area shall not occupy any space required for conformity to the parking regulations of the Zoning Ordinance. Staff will review off-street parking later in the report. 13. The property, including buildings and exterior site areas, shall comply with all applicable fire codes. Planning staff is not aware of any concerns, but any approval should be subject to review and approval by the Fire Marshal. At this time, he is out of the office and unable to review the request. 14. 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 residential uses, and shall be in compliance with Section 903.020.I of the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant does not indicate any changes to the existing lighting. 15. All other provisions and requirements as deemed necessary by the City Council. 16. The applicant complies with the provisions of Section 921 of the Zoning Ordinance. Off-Street Parking All three site plans show 24 parking spaces provided in the same location. Off-street parking areas are required to be paved subject to 903.050.D.8.k which states “All areas intended to be utilized for parking space accessory to commercial, industrial, and attached housing, including associated driveways, shall be paved with asphalt, bituminous, modular pavers, or concrete to control dust and drainage. Other paving materials may be approved by the City Council.” The site has asphalt in front of Building #1, but the area in front of Building #2 is Class V material. The applicant does not indicate in their paperwork how parking will be established (i.e. paving material, size of parking spaces, curbing). Additionally, the applicant is converting some of the existing parking (i.e. northeast paved area outside of fencing) to outdoor storage so nine of the parking spaces proposed will be new. One concern that city staff has with the location of off-street parking, as submitted, is that both buildings have garage/warehouse space (with garage doors) and the off-street parking as shown blocks that entry. One of the notations in the applicant’s materials states that a garage door will be added to Building #2 so access will need to be maintained. As shown, it is staff’s recommendation that the off- street parking spaces be moved to a location that does not conflict with the entry into the warehouse areas or building entrances. For determining the number of off-street parking spaces required it is presumed that Building #1 will be used for Office and Building #2 will be used for warehouse based on the applicants narrative. Mr. Meyer should confirm these proportions and the number of employees if that varies by shift. Preliminary review would require the following number of off-street parking spaces: Warehouse/Storage: 1 space per 1,000 sq. ft. (2) Plus (1) space per employee on maximum shift (28) Plus (1) space per company truck (0) Required parking spaces: 30 Office: 3 spaces Plus at least one (1) space for each 200 sq. ft. of floor area. (21) Required parking spaces: 24 Total required parking spaces for property: 54 parking spaces The zoning ordinance does not support replacing required parking spaces in order to allow for additional outdoor storage areas, which is believed to be the case with the proposed site plans. The City needs to ensure we do not create a situation where there may not be enough off-street parking should the need arise or for a future user. Mr. Meyer has indicated that most of his field employees rarely come to the office. However it is the City’s responsibility to review the off-street parking according to a use, size of the building, and number of employees. Mr. Meyer could submit a Proof of Parking plan based on his needs and that demonstrates his ability to establish the number of required parking spaces at a later date should the need arise. The following is the code provision within 903.050.H. that allows for this plan - 30.Proof of Parking. The City Council may approve a reduction in the actual number of spaces to be constructed accessory to any use by the approval of a Conditional Use Permit, per the requirements of Section 921.030 of this Ordinance. A Conditional Use Permit for such a reduction shall be allowed only where an applicant can demonstrate the following: a.The demand for parking actually needed by the proposed use will be less than ninety (90) percent of the requirement which applies under this Ordinance; b.Based upon an appropriately designed site plan the required number of spaces may be constructed at some future date on the subject site in full conformance with all other requirements of the City’s Zoning Ordinance and Building Code; c.The applicant and City enter into a development agreement, to be recorded against the subject property, which includes a clause requiring the owner to install the additional parking stalls, upon a finding by the Planning Commission that such additional parking stalls are necessary to accommodate the use; d.A change of use will necessitate either a new application for a “Proof of Parking” Conditional Use Permit, or compliance with the applicable Zoning Ordinance standard for parking. As a result, the applicant needs to submit additional detail to ensure compliance with all of the applicable requirements for off-street parking (i.e. size of spaces, location/setbacks, paving materials, number of spaces required). It is staff’s recommendation that Mr. Meyer be required to establish the number of off-street parking spaces as required by code or submit a Proof of Parking plan which would only negate the need to establish a lesser number of spaces, but not grant a variation to the design or material standards. Recommendation City staff has had multiple conversations with Mr. Meyer and his realtor regarding the City’s previous issues and concerns over outdoor storage especially within the Ryan Industrial Park. In addition, staff provided the applicant a copy of the current outdoor storage approvals (site plan attached) and a variance request by the former owner to expand the outdoor storage which was denied. While city staff acknowledges the limited rear yard, the applicant’s plans as submitted are determined to be a variation of code that is inconsistent with the intent of the PUD District and neighboring properties. As a result, Planning Staff is recommending denial of the PUD Amendment as submitted based on the following findings: • The PUD Permit as requested does not comply with the City Code for outdoor storage as an accessory use and does not comply with the off-street parking requirements. • The PUD Permit as requested is inconsistent with the overall intent of the PUD District due to the variation for the location of outdoor storage in the required front yard setbacks, fence height, and screening. • The PUD Permit as requested is inconsistent with the neighboring properties due to the variation for the location of outdoor storage in the required front yard setbacks, fence height, and screening. If the Planning Commission believes that additional consideration should be given to the applicant’s submittal it would be our recommendation that the proposal be tabled. This would allow Mr. Meyer an opportunity to address the concerns noted above and resubmit a site plan that more closely meets the objectives of the PUD District and includes the additional details staff has requested within this report. From:Jessica Jagoe To:Heidi Heller Subject:FW: 3151 Country Dr Narrative Date:Monday, December 04, 2017 11:49:09 AM From: Jennifer Koch [mailto:mplsrealty@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, November 27, 2017 12:24 PM To: Jessica Jagoe Subject: 3151 Country Dr Narrative Meyer Companies, Inc. aka Pete’s Water & Sewer would like to have the opportunity to own the property at 3151 Country Drive in Little Canada because it is a centrally located property with a lot of potential. We have a signed purchase agreement with the current owner dated November 8, 2017 with a close date on or before February 14, 2019. The plan is to occupy property after the city permits have been approved. Meyer Companies, Inc is a sewer and water utility construction company. It is a Native American owned company that has serviced the Twin Cities Metro area for more than 30 years. Its owner, Lee Meyer has devoted his career to the contracting industry. He started his career as a laborer and has done almost every level of job on the way up to becoming a business owner. The employees have been with the company on average for 15 years. We are submitting our proposal for a conditional use permit and variance at this property. Currently, the outdoor storage area is primarily in the back of the buildings. We need a variance because we need storage in the front of the buildings and have included a few different proposed site maps. We are committed to putting a large amount of capital improvements into the property such as the following: -Painting the buildings -Beautiful signage -Significant landscaping -Installation of fencing and gates -Buildout of the buildings to accommodate an office of 7-10 employees Our office is currently located at 8601 73rd Ave N in Brooklyn Park and our outdoor storage and shop located at 2316 Jefferson Ave NE in Minneapolis. Our intentions are to combine the office and outdoor storage at this property. We have included a equipment list, which will indicate the amount of storage that is needed for our business needs. Currently, we have 35 employees, which consist of 7 in the office and 28 primarily in the field. The field employees rarely come to the office location. The largest piece of equipment does not exceed 14’. We plan to park the taller equipment in between the buildings as indicated in the site maps. We are willing to work with the City of Little Canada to make sure that this is a mutually beneficial working relationship. We think this property will be a good addition to the other construction and contracting companies in the neighborhood. Please feel free to call us for further information. Sincerely, Lee Meyer, owner 612.282.5721 Jennifer Koch, realtor 612.644.5198 -- Jennifer Koch Howard Gangestad Real Estate 612.644.5198 From:Jessica Jagoe To:Heidi Heller Subject:FW: Photo Examples Date:Monday, December 04, 2017 11:48:37 AM From: Jennifer Koch [mailto:mplsrealty@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, November 27, 2017 12:23 PM To: Jessica Jagoe Subject: Fwd: Photo Examples Photos of proposed fencing. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Leroy Meyer <lmeyer@petesws.com> Date: Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 11:55 AM Subject: Photo Examples To: Jennifer Koch <mplsrealty@gmail.com> Here are a few examples of what I am thinking the future fence will look like. Also, an image of the building rehab is attached as an example of previous rehab ability. Thanks, Lee Meyer | President Pete's Water & Sewer | www.petesws.com 8601 73rd Ave N., Suite 21 | Minneapolis, MN 55428 Office: 763-515-7428 Ext. 802 | Cell: 612-282-5721 Certified DBE/TGB/MBE/CERT/SECTION 3/SBE/SDB/TMP/Native American Owned Contractor QUALITY - SAFETY - PRIDE - PERFORMANCE STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission Members FROM: Heidi Heller, City Clerk DATE: January 5, 2018 RE: Land Use Training The City has the League of Minnesota Cities as their insurance provider. The League offers a discount to cities if certain members of staff, majority of the elected officials, the Planning Commission Chair and one other Commissioner complete an on-line training. The City will cover the cost of the training, and it can be done at your own pace. All of the Commissioners are encouraged to take the training, and there are more on-line trainings available for those interested. Only course LU501 Land Use Basics: Grasping the Ground Rules is required to qualify for the incentive. The training for Bill and one other Commissioner must be completed as soon as possible. Please let me know asap if you want to participate and I will complete the registration for you. Below is information about the trainings or here is the online link: https://www.lmc.org/page/1/land-use-lc.jsp Land Use Series This is a City Learning Point online training series People have strong feelings about their property rights and the character of their neighborhoods. When conflicts occur, cities often get caught in the middle. This first course in the Land Use Series will help you understand cities’ roles and authority in land use regulation to more effectively navigate controversial situations. Intended audience: • Elected city officials and appointed planning commission members. • City employees who have responsibilities in land use regulation. Each person will access and complete the course individually. Upon receiving log-in credentials, registrants may access the courses online at any time and go at their own pace. Incentive: An LMCIT Land Use Incentive is available to cities that meet certain training participation requirements. Please contact the League for more information related to the incentive (see details at right). Courses: • Course LU501—Land Use Basics: Grasping the Ground Rules • Course LU502—Creating the Ground Rules: Developing Land Use Plans and Laws Course LU501—Land Use Basics: Grasping the Ground Rules Cities must consider many perspectives and priorities when making land use decisions, and costly conflicts can occur when cities don’t follow the ground rules. In this course, you will reflect on land use challenges that your city has faced and the consequences that can result when a city oversteps its authority. You’ll consider typical land use situations where you’ll be asked to identify what role the city is playing and determine what information can be considered when making land use decisions. Recognizing your city's role and how much authority it has can help your city avoid expensive lawsuits, minimize controversy, and make land use decisions less confusing. Course objectives: Upon completion of this course, participants will be able to: • Appreciate the tensions in land use regulation and the consequences of overstepping the city’s authority. • Identify what role the city is playing for each land use decision that it makes. • Determine what authority the city has in land use situations and what information the city may consider when making a decision. Course LU502—Creating the Ground Rules: Developing Land Use Plans and Laws Cities have broad powers to set a community vision and create land use regulations to achieve it. However, cities have different needs and approach planning and land use regulation in different ways. The approach any city takes toward land use planning and regulation is ultimately a policy choice for each city to make. In this course, you will learn about a five-step model to guide your city’s approach to land use planning and how to engage the public throughout the community planning process. You'll also complete activities that will help you develop goals, strategies, and regulations to effectively carry out your community’s vision for the future. Proactive planning and regularly updating laws can minimize controversy and help cities make legally defensible land use decisions. Course objectives: After completing this course, participants will be familiar with how to: • Use a five-step model to guide community planning efforts. • Employ various methods to broadly involve the community in defining a vision and goals for the future. • Develop effective strategies for meeting planning goals. • Create land use regulations that effectively carry out the community’s vision.