The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1996 Planning Commission Packets� s � �- � � � � i� � � � � �,.o� a" � � � � o � �� y� � � m � '1 � � � � t�i � � � ^ � � Q0 � �3 Gj � � o. �-i � � o. � � � '< CA] vw "�°+ o c9 � � y� m, � :a � v�a ,� ��` �� y �. � � � n v � � w O � � ro (D ^�� Oo Q° (9 S PD C. M v O O � � J�� J- C � A � � '� 7 �� # # N � � W -� cn �o h) u� � N � e� W o� �G7 n) � � � � �. v o `.a � m � � na � � m � � �, -- .� � a � � � � � � � � '1P9 � •� .� v en 00 —� � N N � P � V C°J C.� N � � � � m . � � v �a N �„ � -- -�a O W N "d O (d �° � � � m __'W N �. m. � � ry1 � `J C � �A d � � � � � I.JY vy O� b �: N � � � � V � w d y y � � A7 --, � �O N � N � p � R ��,� m � � `O � O� �.r W N --• f N O G.• �. Lsr � z � O ` E < m � � � � � T (n N N --� d ,,,a 1.�9 �O N V� W AJ -.+ O (J O� � N � � N 4- � � I m v o c^' � „r � � T C.lT � � � � a � r� � � � � . , � O� Yt � � � V cn �' . r., � � cn v9 � � � V O W 0` � � � �. �+ -� r�a � . �A Cn °' � � i � �� e�a � � W � N � � � H W s �. u �� u�+ � �O R:! 0 N --+ � A V C7 � � � � � cn flo N a 1�3 IaJ r V O W � a � I F� N � ay d. � �O FJ f.h f/7 } � � ` � Z f1'1 � � 6�7 N � � V tn � A � N ch °� � � Ce] N °°' �O PJ � O td Q� � CeJ 1�. —� � � v r � ^' `� �: A -� U m `O N � � FJ N -�' O� tn �f ''J' C.) � y � m � il� � � � N � � N �J ---' O� � �1 C• W D � i.J h., d � � m � C A5 h.) � � `�O N Cn m •� � °A O N '� �O n� �y C.` O� � b V p � I � � � d V tn � � �O N lyy � � � o w � `a� � -a � �� c �� I � �y (.iT T N N -� � � - � O W � -� w • � V! cr� ay O� �O N � � � N � a � � . �a � w R, � � N �s V � � —� A � 1J N � � � � � �O N Uy � y � � � � � d Ca.1 tJ9 A � � — u� V C7 � , � n� ... .� w � � a � � � � O� �S N N � � w N � p� m V � N y BO � N � W N �+ . O :...7 p. �O N fs'1 � � � i � � � n -� � T C/� � � '� V V1 W A. �O N U9 � � > W N �°° �U N � O W O� h� � �J � O � .� � � r U Pj -� '� � � la� � � �J A: � O+ (./+ V CJ (.7 �` _�' � ��'�., �, �; � ::: !: t. �`. ;�+ � ►..; L � R � ; ... ! �. � � .. , ,. � . ; " .. �. ' ` �...�. . � ��.1 � �' . � .�:�� . ;,.: �.; -' ..- �; , . . . ... : . . � � - x Regular AAeetir�g August 7, 1996 �ound� 1/i�w City F�all 240i Highway 1O, Mounds View, iVIN 55112 , . _ . � ,.. � � . ��.: � � _ � � _ , � . � � _. .y� , ;. ,: - , .. . , ._�� Planning Associate Pruitt expiain�d that Everest Property (V�anagement is requesfir�g a F'UD amendment and d�velopment revi�w to expand ihe parking iot at 5251 Program Aver�ue, Buildir�g G and reminded the Piac�ning Commission t�at this item was disc�assed at th�ir July 24, 1996, �genda me�tir�g. She � con�inued by �xpiaining that tFte applicant is requesting to have a n�t increase of 35 par�ing stall� on �h� east side of fhe property and wishes to increase the n�mber og st�lls in order io meet the demand� of a fe�ant that may (ocate to ihe business park which wil! bring fhe fotal number of par6�ing stall� provided on the site fia 50�. She noted that 4he plans indicate the parkir�g spa�es located or� fihe east side of fhe praperty will abui the property lin� and noted that at the l�s� meeting the Plar��ing Commission agreed fo aflow parking up to 4he property line for this F�UD amendr�nent since a iandscaping buffer is being provided wifihin fihe right-of-way. it was also noted that the p�rking area to the souih of ihe building wiEl be restriped. She also indic�ted that �ick Wriskey, Ci#y Fores�er, has requested the existing trees be moved within 8 to 9 feet from the curb along fhe right-of-way ar�d aiso that the applicant has been advised that fhe amendment wi11 require Rick Creek Wafershed District approval. Planr�ing Associate Pruitt �noted the coniingencies coniained in Reso(�a#ior� Ncr. 468-96 whict� are: 1) a lar�dscaping pian be submitted subje�i to apprc��ai of th� City Foresfier a�d 2} approvai be given from Rice Creek Watershed �istrict. �Aofion/Second: �rasaemle/f�iller to approv� R�s�lufii�r� �o. 4��96 �� amended recrammendir�g �pprov�i �f a� amer�dment fo ' . - . ; -. ��_�`; >i ; �! . • � �':� � � �, � �,_ -• - i' i � •�,! i . � r �- ' i* . �,,, j i. �,. � `.� i .. � a ! " • - ti • i • ! � � � . a � e; J �J£S o f1��S � .� - ��. : - - - � ... � - • ' • . . � � ��_ �� ...�� ' „R ...'�' �. �, �.� �� * �. �� ^ {' ,' #i .3... .� � �� . ��'' #�..� !� '"-- � �.�� :.. _ i _ � ■ - � • !: � � ! �. � i 5 �y�$ o �ay� The applicani w�� ir�formed that this item would be forvvarded to tf�e �iiy Co�an�il af their Augu�t meeting for ac�ion. Bill Diem, �f Stahl Construciion, was present. Community �evefopmer�# Director Pamel� �heldon noted fihat this item was discus�ed �i fhe Planning Commission agenda meeting and fihafi Stah! Construciion is requesfiing to build � church, the N�vu s4postc�lic Church, on ihe property located at 3025 County Road H. �ommunity f�ev�Eopmenf Director Sheidon ir�formed the Planning Commission ihat there was new information r�egarding parking �nd drainage for fhis reque�f. She cor�finued by expfair�ir�g that the �uilding Inspecior had cal��alaied ihe total p�rkir�g stalls required based on fhe to#al area o� the building, not th� seating cap�cify, �nd tha� St�hf Constructi�n �as asked thai it be recalculated by i�e area that will be �sed for seating. Stahl'� poin4 was thaf nr�4 �ii nf fih� are� will be used for seating �n� th�y anfiicipate their parking need� will nc�t � Motion Carried f�lotior� Carri�d Public Infarmational Meeting Regarding the Request of Stahl Constructi�n for the Construction of ihe New Apostoli� Chur�h at 3025 County �oad �I, �fanning Gase No. 452-96 Mounds ilievv Plar�ning Cemmission R�guiar �e�ting be as gr��t as portrayed in fihe Ciiy's ar�alysis. She also explained that a r�tention area may noi be required beca�ase fhey have an alternative prop�s�i to use a clarificatior� di#ch and ii�at our Engineering consultant is avvaiting a proposaf from Stahi Construction as to how they will modify fhe p�rking lot fio make this proposai v�ork. Director Sheldon recommertded ta f�e Planning Commissior� thafi this item b� tabled at this point buf nc�ted that the applicant is req�esting ti�at the Planning Commission act on #he variar�ce so that ihe lay-out vf the site car� be arr�nged. The Planning Commissi�n inquired aboui the curb cufs thai are nat irt compfi�nc�. Planning Associafe Pruitfi in�Formed fhe Commissior� that the app{icar�i desires io r�medy this issue and come into compliar�ce with City Code. Plannir�g Associate Prui�t also r�ofed iiems that need to be addressed: landscaping, fir� suppression system, driveway access, exits an both sides of the building, revised floor pfans shov�ing one siary not two, revised drainage plans for approval by ihe Ciiy Engir�eer ar�d submiftal of an application for a wetiand aiteration permi4. ihe app�icant, Biil Diem, axpiained tha� he is in favor af temporarily tabling �his item due to the fact th�f the main office 'For the New Apostoiic Church is Iocated in Pennsyivania �nd tha4 it may take some additional iirr�e to gef all the items required. Lyle �eilis, 2�7i Couniy R�ad H, ir�quired wrheiher or not �h� proposed b�ilding would be a mu[ti-person r�siden�e. �r. Diem respo�ded thafi there wo�aEd be no residence �n �ifie. �r'. Bellis also asked if � traific study h�d been don� because �� f�ff this proposa# w��d inc��as� traf�ic flow. Mr. Di�m indicated fhai � . -••, w ' i �,�" 1 ,'� J �: 1 !' ��-� � � " !' �: j{ ' '�. r ��., � � � � �: ►. ...�. . - •a* ■ �. �, a, .:�. they did hire a sut�ey�r, who spec�ali�es in �raffic �tcac�ies, but reminded fihe residents ihaf ihis facility wauld mair�ly be used ondy on �ur�days and VVed�esday evenings. Gommissioner �rasa�mie inquired if the buildir�g wo�ld be one-siory. 6�ir. Dienn indicated fihai �he facility wouEd be first-floor �t grade and � basemenfi for a toiai of 2,002 square fe�t. N1r. Diem �t this fime ��ow�d the plans to the resider�ts. Some �f ihe drair�age cor��erns were discussed, rr�ainiy the flovv �f drain�ge or� the site. ihe applicant assured fhe Commissio� �nd ihe r�sider�t thai he h�d been in cont�ct with f�ice Gr'eek VVafershed Disfrict and r��t�d fha# there i� currentiy a filtration systerr� in place along County Road H. Some residents w�re sti!! �oncerned with fl�e water ftowing to th� north. fVlr. i�iem assur�d the residents that �11 wa�er would drain to a gravel bed fio the souih. Steve Borden, 3009 County Road H, addre�sed ihe Pianning Commission expressing his cancern regarding drainage o€ the property. He asked if additional v�rater vvould b� draining to Court#y Road H. Mr. Diem indic�ated that ihey are proposing a filfiration and detention ar°ea and �here is ihe availability of berms, curb c�a��, etc. fo sfodv the water dowr�. He also i�dicated fihat more water would be flowing, however, the r�fe w��aid b� coniro[l�d. We aisr� inciicaf�d tha4 they will try to provide mor� green space �nd are propo�ing more gree� space an i�e southwe�t corn�r of the properfiy and wil! address any �esfhetic is�ues. �- * - � � ��' , � i y �. � ' 1� : _. -�y. � � �_' � ' __ �R .. IM i ^_ � * -! f - � � ' • .�. .� �... 1i �. �, .. - ... �. The Planning Commissior� r�esponded by indic�fiing fih�t c�urches are an allowed use by c�ndifiior�ad use perrr�it i� an R-1 District. S�te afso had a cor�cerr� regarding tF�e future gro�nrth of the facility and what would �appen #o the buiEding if the churc� vacaies. �r. Diem explained tha# the structure being propased is �ice the siz� �eeded fio allaw for future grovv�h ar�d, if the congregafion did b�cc�me to� iarge, part of the congregatian wouEd be moved to a nev� buiiding. He irrdicated that a rnajority o� fhe congregation now lives in the Mounds \/i�w area. Ms. Cloues also asked what the church woufd be us�d for. Mr. Diem explained that Sunday Schoo! would begin at 8:45 a.m., worship services wiould be held af 10 a.m. ar�d 5 p.m_, the choir meets fwice a month, a evenir�g �rorship �er�ice i� i��ld on Wednesdays at � p.m. and als� noted that the average attendartce on Sunday is 6Q-70 pe�ple at the rnorning services, 20 people at the evening seniices and 20 people at the Wednesday service. Lyle Be[Iis, 2977 County Road I�, asked duhy tfte churct� didn'i rebuild iheir current �aciEit� in the Midway area. fVlr. Diem again stated that a majori#y of the members live in f�iis area. �arb Cloues, 2875 County Road H, inquir�d about fhe parking issue and whether there was enough and was concerned about off-street parkir�g. ihe applicant indicated tha# no off- street parking is r�eeded �nd that 17-1 � c�rs is ihe ma�t fihey hav� had at ane �ime. Rochelle IVloonq 6929 Pleasant Viev� Driv�, inquired as ta why the churci� doesn't gei a property beti�r sui�ed for tl�e faciiity wi�h more greer� space. � . � . � ! M � �,�`. R I :'.: 1..:": ... _..�:..... .:'+':'.' _' _ __'__ l �`i � _ _ �� . . �, 1R ::. � .... a ' �- �, i � �� ! ' �an Moon, 6929 Pieasant 1/iew �rive, r�ferer�ced anather particular prop�rty tha� i�e ch�arch �ad been looking a4. Th� applicant ie�dicafed this pariicular property had an easement running fihre��agh it whicFt w�uld noi m�ke ifi a desirable site for 4he churc#�. Steve �order�, 3009 County Road H, indicated thai he is avvare �f land av�iiable on Highw�y 10, or� boih sides, �hat may be better sui#�d. °The applicant expl�ir�ed fihat the abiii#y fo�° a ch�rch to build in a r�sidential disirict has been profiect�d. He al�� explainecf that other pr�perties ihaf fhey htad looked at did not Ftave sewer a�d water to fihe site wi�ich would �ost mor� to insfiall than the !o� itseifi. Lyie Bellis, 2977 County Road H, rneniioned thafi a developer (Steve �ord�n af this time indicated tha� fhe deveioper was Larry Beach and that he was #old by Mr. Beach 4hat hi� _ name could be used at this meefing) tried to develop th� property with no �ooperation from the City. Pfanning Associate Pruitt responded by indicating that she h�s not been approached by Mr. Beach regarding development of this site. Comrr�issioner �rooks asked wheiher or r�ot church r�presentatives are aware of neighbaring property owr�er�' objectio� to this proposai. Mr. Diem expfained that, in his experience, the d�velapment af schoois and ch�srches i� �iway� oppos�d. He #urther explained fhafi typic�lly commercial d�ve�opmenfi doesn'fi create a� rriuch c�ntroversy since thase properties are afready zoned for thai partic�a(�r use. �, � _ .� .• � - _ N - r � - 1�: � + s � �- • � . � - i i �i �� x � � - ' � �g�insi churche� but doe� have a co�cer� about the church parking lo� being r�exi �o her house. iVir. Diem indica4ed that I�r�dscapir�g is required for � b�ffer. Commissioner �rasaemle ask�d where the parking issue �tands with the Z2 stall difference from what is r�quired. Planning Associai� Pruitt explair��d thafi fhe building ir�spector �as gone over the floor plans based on maximum occupanCy Ioad of �he b�aiidir�g and that the applican� would need #o shovv proof of permanent seating for fhe faciliiy. Comrr�unity Developmeni Director Sheldnn indicated that there is a one stall p�;r four seat requir�d p�r Gity Code ar�d that 32 s#alls currently are proposed. Lyle �elii�, 2977 County Road H, asked whether or not the church congregation was required to sing and was concerned about the noise level. The applicant indicated that, yes, they would be singing and said that eonstructian �rould can�ist of 6 inch ins�lated wails. �arb Cloues, 2875 County Road H, asked if photographs were avaiiabl�. The app{icant indicated that he would bring the photographs to the nexfi meeting. Planning Associate Pruiit informed the residents thai she indicafed to ih� appficant that this item woufd more than likeiy be 4abled so ih� appiicant was not prep�red io make a presen�ation at this meeting. Lynn 1/1lidseth, 3001 County Road H, said thaf she was not aware of a predious meeiing that r�aas held regarding this issue. Plar�ning Associat� Pruitt expiair�ed tha� a pubiic hearing is oniy required at the Cify G��n�il leve! and � .R . ' �� `- ± i - i' � i � 'i ; `, Ma�nds View✓ �'ianr�ing Cc�mmi�sion August 7, 199f R�gular M�eting Page 9 that fhis informational meetir�g a# the F'iar�ning Commissic�n Cevel wras heEd as a couriesy. Lyl� Beflis, 2977 County Road W, �gain expressed his concerns regarding ihe �raific issue. �t�air Peierson asked the �pplicanf to describe the desigr� of the b�silding. The appiic�nt ai thi� tim� gave a bri�€ descriptivn of #he (ay-oui and indieat�d tha# f�oor plar�s wo�sld �e presented at the ne� rne�fiing. Ro�helle fUfoon, 6929 Plea�a�t Viewe �rive, expressed her concerns iha� if a berm wras inst�lled it may dry out. Chair Peterson noted thai afi this time quesfiions are taken regarding the buildi�g sfru�ture, and they v�ould gef into drainage issues �r�d show howr the grade works later. Lynn Widseth, 3001 County Road H, asked if #here were any handicapped individuals in �he congregation and was concerned about h�ndicapped persons escaping during a fire. The appiicani irtdicated that currently there ar� no handicapped individuals in the congregation and explained that ifi is a requiremer�t 4hat fi�o staircas�s b� instailed alo�g with egr�ss windows (whict� woufd ac�orr�modate the handicapped) in the ba�emen4. �arb Cloues, 2�75 Couniy Road H, expressed her �ancerns about th� �ecurity issue �nd that she �ee� v�ry li�fl� polic@ iraffic or� Caur�ty Road H. Yhe appiicant explained fhat vandalism is a product of our soci�#y and, a� alw�ys, is ai �he risk of th� prnper#y �wners. He ais� ir�dica��d that �hurches have th� same r�tia for va�dalism as s�rip ma(Is. �hair Petersor� a�k�d if a monifor�d �ec�arity �ystem Mounds �/ievv Planning Gommis�ion R�guiar Meeting x . -.., -..:- � w�uld be i�stafled? ihe applicant expiained �hat to pui a security syst�m in ravo�ald be the decision of the owner �r�d also informed iher� ihat the church i� self i�sured. �arb CEoues, 2875 Co�nty Road H, was concerned about her safe#y. T}�e appli�ant indica4ed #hat the�rate of fc�ss 40 � retail mall is les� than thafi o# residenfial property. Sfeve �orden, 3009 Counfiy Road H, ask�d if fhe lighfing on the sit� v�o�ld be on. ihe applicani explained ihai no direci illuminatian is allowed onto adjacer�t prtaperties. Lyle �ellis, 2g7i Courtty Road H, asked whai the addresses of the congr�gation members were and how many w�r� s�uth of Highway 36. ihe applicani informed Mr. Bellis that 5 percent of the congregati�n iived soufh of Highway 36 and approximately 20 percent live in �ll�unds Vi ew. Chair Peterson asked the appiicant to address the drainage issues. Mr. Diem began by expl�ining that better ihan 15Q feet is going towards the wesi and exiting at a controll�d rate to Pleasanfi View Drive and the remainder to County Road H. 7he Planning Commission noted 4hat the Engineer expressed concern with filt�ation. Mr. Diem continued to expEain the drainage for the siie. The applicani stated tha# they are proposing io mave the building farther to ihe west, some addition�l parking would then be in back and more greer� spac� would be cr°eated at �he exit. Lyle 6ellis, 297°7 Go�anty Road H, inquired about th� prcaposal to widen C��snty Road I�. Ghair �e#erson informed �im ih�i Plan�ing ', i` �our�d� VieNV Planning Commission August 7, 7 996 Regular Meeiir�g p�g� � � •. �. .. _ � .;. . �- . '�.•.. S#eve Bcard�n, 3009 County Road H, expressed his concern with the parking el�vations and th� {ot draining to #i�e north�ast �nd ru�tning through his yard, ihe applicant explain�d fiha4 the entrance will be high enaugh fo contain 4Me drainage an� then re�pped �he proposed drainage plans fior the site and the prop�sed fay-out c�f the building. ��rb Cf�ues, 289� Caur�ty Road M, was concerr�ed about the 3/12 slope io ihe �orde�'s properfy. l°he appiicant explained that they would naf be char�ging #he grade near the �orden's praperty to the eas4. C�mmissioner Miller w�s concerned �ith fhe �cc�mulafii�n of water on the north side of the building. The applicant said that there would no acc�amulation and demonstrated the proposed water flow for the site. Lyfe Beilis, 2977 Gouniy Road Fi, as�ed if there would be an eniranc� on Co�anty Road H. �he appficant sfiated fihat yes ihere wouid be an entrance anto County Road H and that he has contacted Ramsey Caunty and was inform�d thafi there would be no p(ans io capdate County R�ad H. Steve 6orden, 3009 Coun#y Road H, indicated that he believed tha# there are pians fo update Cour�ty Ro�d H ir� 1999 �nd was concer�ed about tha� green �pace fhat wvufd be removed from the ch�rch for fihis project. The applicant indicated tha� if Ramsey Caunty plans to rn�iden County Road H fihey wo�aid fir�t rte�d fi� buy property frotr� the existir�g resid�nts ir� ord�r to do so. He als� indi�ai�d thai fhe green space proposed f�r �I�is prc�jeci is net on ar� �asement I � I i,� fVlo�ar�ds Vi�w Planr�ing C�rr�rnission Augus� 7, 1996 Regul�r Meeting Page 12 ; and �hat at least a fi�e foot sefback wrould Eae required for ihe instafiation of sidew�alks alc�ng Cour�ty Road H. Commissianer �rasaernle informed Mr. Diem that fhe sidewa[k along Lang Lake Ro�d �bufis th� property line because ihere wasn'i enough space to pr�vide five feet and also that a temporary consfiruction easemen# wa� given by the r�sidents. Chair Pef�rson asked the app[icant to address the snow storage issu�. Mr. Diem explained 4hat 2 per�ent of the green space proposed for the site will be used as sr�ow storag� with ihe additional storage comir�g from or�e parking space. Sfieve �order�, 3005 County Ro�d H, inq�ired as to the parking lot setbacks. Planning Ass�ciate Pruitt indicated that there i� a five fooi mi�imum sefback requiremen#. fVlr. �ard�n also expre�sed ihafi he believes that parking requir�menis shouid be calculated by maximum occupancy of the building. Community Development Director Sheldon explained th�t parking is tied to permaneni seating capacity. Dan Moon, 6929 Pleasar�t Vi�w Drive, asked if fhere would be concurrent use of Sunday school and church services and was �oncern�d about fihe parking issue. The appiicar�t i�dicated ihat there would be no conCUrrent used tor these activities and th�i it has neve� ...- -. Lynn VVidseth, 300� Couniy Road H, asked whaf the afenomination of the �h�rc.� is? ihe appiicant st�ted �f�at it i� Chris#ian, fF�e Nevv Apostoli� Ch�rch. ,; � �� _ . ,; - ' „ . , ,. � � ` l, _ ; ; ;. ------------ . _..: . . . '- ;_ ,, � � i M � � r. ! ': Dave (;riffen, 2965 �ou�iy Road H, inquired as io what �he church is doir�g rtov+r �iih #heir property? fi�r. Diem explainecf that the chur� is currenily ren�ir�g because th�ir facility has beer� soid. �arb �loue�, 2897 Cour�ty Road H, agairt expres�ed her �ncerns regardir�g altern�tive parking and Chair F'eferson assur�d her that fhese issues wilf be addressed. �A�. Cloues also inquired as fo the signage fha# would be on site. ihe applicant explain�d that there would be an illurnir�aied cr�ss or� the buildirrg ar�d a sign wo�ald show the name of fihe c�ic�rci�, servic� and Sunday school fiime� at�d it would be loca��d or� the building near the �n#r�nce. Addiiionat snow storage issues vv�re reiterated � and the applic,ani expfair�ed that snorr� storage ` w�ilt not be Iecated in are�s where wafer is expected to drain. Shelley �orden, 3a09 County Road i�, asked fihe Planning Commission what "tablingn �his i�errt m�ans? it�e Planning Commission explained tha# there is not enough infarmation to make a decisior� ai this time. Pf�nning Associafied Pruitt nofed at this time t�at a wetland alter�tion permifi is also needed. Community Deveiopment �irector Sheldort asked when the City could expec# to receive the need�d items for review from fhe �pplicani. Mr. Diem indicated tl�at tl�ey wo�ald be suppii�d in one week and r�rill be shown ta th� Pianr�ing Commission �f the next rrr�eeting. i�he inforrn�tion�l meeting w�s closed �i 9:0� p. m. i ..:i. • " � � � � � • ^ � - • Communiiy Developmeni Direcfor Sh�idon indicated th�f we will n�ed to review n�w pians i� de�ermine what the variance reques� is. Cf�air Pefierson and Cammis�ianer �r�saemle expressed their concems that ihis proposal did noi meet ihe criteria for granting a variance. ihe applicant indicated that they are seek�ng � varianc� in order to add green space but th�4 focating fihe building on the siie is workabfe without a variance. M�tion/Secand: �ras�emle/�ruok� to table thi� item with no action to be taken before ih�ir �epiember 4, 1996, meeting. - � �ommission�r Brasaemle infor°med t�e resider�ts of the nexf plar�ning Commissio� meeting dates of Wednesday, Augu�t 21 and ihe regular meeting to be held on September 4, 1996. Planning Associate Pruit# informed the Commission thai she wotald be vdriting the appiicant a letter requesting an additianal fi0 days in order to process the application. Community Develapmenfi Director Sheld�n reviewed tF�is item indicating that the Mounds View ordinance require� developmeni contracts for a(most every st�p in th� d�veiopmer�t pracess, wheiher fihe �t�p involves improvements or not. Ii is st�ffs understanding thaf #he purpose eaf the requirer�en� is fo ma�ce sure ir��r�vements ar� cornplet�d. Si�e rec�mm�nded th�t, for priva�e improvem�r�ts, a better �pproach wc��ald be io all�w appli�r��s ta proceed �rifihouf postir�g security. i�, at #he tirrte � � ��* "',�, `." Mofiion Carried 7. Consideration of Resofution No. 470-96 Regarding Ordinance No. 5�8 (Chapter 1006.06} i '-': I �� ii a , ! f R i, f • ' ` ^ • - �1 when fhe appiic�r�i w�nts occupancy of th� �OUildir�g, the items are not complet�d, the City would decid� if if wouEd allow security to be posted and o�c�pancy permits to be issued, or require that fhe impro��m�nt� be complet�d. Right now �he City requires that the applican# pui �p security before construction is started, when th� u�ual pra�iic,� i� to construct priv�fie improvements al�ng wi#f� constr�actian of t�e b�ilding. ihere ar� o�casi�ns when improvement� such �s I�r�d�capi�g can�oi be cornpleted ur�til the �ext gro�uing season b�cause v� v�reat�er. In ihese sifivations, security could be r�quir�d for installa�ior� of th� landscaping ar�d �n occup�ncy permit iss�aed. For publi� impravern�nts such as sidevvalks, curb �nd gutter, sireets, etc., developm�nt cor�firact� and securiiy are needed and no change is proposed in this requiremer�t. She expressed that deve(opmeni contracts �re not r�eeded f�r pr�posais such as aversized garages. Resol�ation No. 470-96 t�lks aboui making these minor items exempt because no other improvements are invalved. It was requested by the Plar�ning Commission that Resoiufiio� No. 4i0�96 be ame�ded to state that the Planning Commission recomm�r�d and the City Council grant waiver� when such contracts are not needed t� f�ifill the requiremen4s of the ordin�nce, ra�her than exempi ceriain �ituations. ihe Planning Commission discussed fhat there are same cases when the constru�tion of an aversi�ed garage ir�volves removal of oiher strucfures and then a developmer�t contr��t and sec�ri�y is needed. �otie�n/Second: Mill�r/�ra�aemle �o table the c�nsider�tio� o� Resofutiora No. 47Q-96 reg�rding Ordinar�ce No. 5�� m�r�ding th� deveiapmeni �ontraci I��guage of chapt�r x � •�! r.�� . �� R . • ��. � � � { . * � _. • :...�. * � � � _ � f .i . ' •�� ■ �� , ,. � 006.06, Subdivision 4, of ihe (��nicipai Code, with direction io st�ff that the Plannit�g Commission review the �pecific wording af the praposed �rdir�a�ce revisior� before it is seni fo City Co�neil. (Commissianer Brooks leff the meeierrg at 9: 3� p. rrt.) � ayes 0 nays Plar�ning Associa#e Pruift reviewed this i�em indicating fhat ihe City of Mounds Vie�►+was Informed tha� ihe �ity's flood plain ordir�ance is not considered comp[iant by the Minnesota Department of Natural R�sources and thai a nonconforming uses section and a�eciion addr�ssir�g fravel traifers is encouraged to be added. She �lso indicated that this ordinance needs to be in place by S�ptember 1, 'I 996, or the City of Ntounds �/iew will be suspEnded from the FEf�A program. The Planning Commission inquired as io haw much of Mounds View is affected. (A FEMA map was shown fio the Pfanning Comrrtission �t this time). Motion/Second: Johnston/�rasaemie to recommend approval nf Resol�ation No. 47� -96 as amend�d by Sfaff io meet Department af Natura! Resources (DNR) criteria, regarding Ordinance Na. 5�9 amending �hapter 1301, eniit(ed "Flood �'lain Zonir�g". � ay�s a r�ays Planr�ing �ssociate Pr�i�t inforr�i�d fihe Pfar�ning Commissior� that she ha� �ccepied a position with the City �f Hasti�gs �r�d wili be � �� .� �� ,,,: Considerafion of Resol�aiion No. 471-96 Regarding Ordin�nce Na. 589 (Ghapter 130i , Flood Plair� Zonin9) iViotion Carried E."�'�iif": - :.. � l � Mau�ds View Pl�nning Commission , F�egular Meeting leaving the City �� Nlo�ands !liew with Aug�as� 30 as her iast day. She aiso introd�aced the r��w Comm�nity Dev�lopment Dire�4or, Pamela Sheldon, and welcomed her �boarr� and thanked the P1anr�ing Commission for th�ir cooperation and unders#andi�g d�rir�g her time as Acting Comm�nity Dev�fopment �irector. ,41i mer�tbers were preseni at the July 24, � 996, agenda meetir�g. �aiso present w�re Pl�r�ning Associate Prui#t and �ommunity Developmeni Director Sheldon. Chair Petersor� requested iha� the agenda be ch�nged to c�r�fain r�ot oniy ihe �h�i�s Repor� but al�o that it include ihe ofher Planning Commissior�ers. There being �o furthe� b�asiness before the �� Planning Commission, Chair Peterson __ ad�ourned �he meefing at 9:40 p.m. Respecif�aliy Submifted, � �1 r � � � Pamela 5heldon Community Developmen4 �irector �� . ...�. . , ., '-��.... r_ ., Adjourr�mer�t ..-, : . , ..t: .:.. . . ....-. i :. , _.._:�: ��/(�'' ,¢J �i <v� r�., :4 ,--.'.�" F29 ' 4 //� . � �; � L" � . 2 � � � �..� y9 � / � ,,� L,d '�..{i✓ � �l � A _a i � � f J1 '�.. �;' �,..4 `� L��,_ : � ��j�� '��''�'��''_�� , ; ��` i�'_�_� ' ; � r.,.�`" ,,,.� 1 .� { . ; � �, : J r - + � �L��J'Yt-�- %( �c� (�9'a9 .��a.aain-� � �, � ,� r�� q� P/�� ;�� . ; ; �G�..� `� ��y� Y-��a� C�� o � ��sozw� v�r � � � � 6 ,� � � G�� -� �D�q �Cor�� / �� °?�� ` , . . `�a i �r �e �'�n�. v� �� ..� ►�� J��y ��-.� ��,��,� :: �--� ,� � ��-� __� ... �-�e. � t c�se�. � �� r. .-`..:f'L.i�t--t°--P ��- �'�i-�'�� --f�--- � �� .� �' �� i �� g �� s ��77 �. �,,� ��d% �� . 3� j ��,� � ��f s��, •� �. �� :,� r� ��'� � e � a � i >., ;�i �: ;, : , ,�,. i . `': �' ,� . ; s `, . .�' �'; ` , ��Il� ��< �taft° �tep�a°� b�a Pla�neng �'ase File I�1�.: Itequesta I'etii��r�e�°t I.ocat�m�o I'�Pi �Too ITEM ��5 5eptember 4, 1996 Pamela Sheldon, Community Deveiapment Director �� 454-96 Minor subdivision to create two lots Erik Anderson 802I East�rood Road 06-30-23-41-0041 �or�ir�g/I��d TJse� The property is eurrently zoned R-1, Single Family Residentiai and is improved with one house. The proper�y contains 38,114 square �eet (d.87 acres). Applacabie. �tteguia�io�sa 5eciion 1241.43, Subd. 1 I, defnes a minor subdivision as "A subdivision of a parcel or parcels of properiy less than tvvo acres in size in which no more than one additional parcel or iot is created." Section 1202.01, Subd. i, states "Minor subdivision requests shall require at least a surveyor's certi�tcate for approval." Section 1104.02, 5u6d. 2, requires a minimum 1ot width For R-1 interior Iots oi75 feet. Section 1104.02, Subd. 3, requires a miinimum lot size requirement of 11, 000 square feet for an R-1 intezior lot, Section 12fl4.02, Subd, 2, requires a"park dedication fee" (dedication to the public for pub[ic use as parks, playgrounds, public open space or storm water holding areas of ponds) 0�$100.00 per care for a. gross density of 0.0-2.Q dweliing units per acre. tlti�el�mentse Pianning Application Warranty Deed Zoning Map Certificate of Survey (reduction) Certificate of Surve� (full size enclosed with packet) Reso[�tion Recommending Approval '� Planning Case No. 454-96 Septemi�er 4, 1996 Page 2 �ackg�°oures3: Erik Anderson, the applicant, is requesting a minor subdivision to split the property at �021 Eastwood Road into two separafie parceis. At th� 1'lanning Comm�ssion's agenda meeting on August 21, 1996, several issues were raised: � the removal of the vvord "proposed" from the utility and draina�e easements � the encroachment of the driveway into proposed utility and drainage easemenis � the spelling of the appiicant's name Since the Planning Commission meeting, severai other items have come to Iight. The quick claizn deed in the file showing 1VI�-. Anderson's ownership of the property was dated October 24, 1995 did not show evidence of recordation. VVe requested Mr. Anderson to supply a recorded copy of this deed. He has provided us with a copy of a warranty deed for the property, but it also does not show evidence of recordation. A contingency has 6een included in the attached resolution requiring that evidence of ownership be supplied prior to #he City Council taking action on this case. Ramsey County has established standards fror the format for land surveys if they are used for creating lots. A title block, approval block for the City Council, and signature blocks for the Department of Property Taxation, County Surveyor and County Registrar of Titles are needed and have been added by the applicant. The City Attorz�ey has advised that easements cannot be dedicated by way oi a land survey, and need to be dedicated by a separate recorded easement. Analyses: The proposed lots each meet tihe minimum lot area and width requirements as outlined in the Zoning Ordinance. Minimum Lot Area (Interior) (Interior) Required Proposed I1,000 appr.19,057 i 1,000 apgr. 19,057 Minimum Lot Width ;! {Interior) 75 feet 82.5 feet (Tntenor) 75 feet 82S feet Requirement Met? YES YES YES YES Planrvng Case No. 45�#-96 September 4, 1996 Page 3 The applicant has provided a revised Iand survey r�hich shows the following: � correct spelling of his name � addition of t�e required title block, approval block and c�riificates � removal of the word "proposed" fro►n the labeling of the easements 73edFc�tior� of easenaer�ts: The applicant has submitted proposed wordzng for the dedication of the easernents, which needs to be reviewed by the City Attorney. Because this requirement only came to iighi this week, we have not had time to put the ea,sernenYs in final form. We have included a contingency in the attached resolution that the easements be approved as to %rm by the City Attorney, and signed by the appiicant, priar to any approval by the City Council. EracYOachnrent of'r1Yiv�vay: The applicant has agreed to rernove that portion of the driveway which �s encroaching into the easement on Parcel A. A contingency to this effect is included in the attached resoIution. \l -.._- Evadence of ayvaaershap: As is noted above, we do not have complete evidence that Mr. Anderson is the owner of the property. A contingency reguiring him to supply evidence of ownership prior to the City Councii taking action on this application is inciuded in the attached resolution. t�Cinor errors: TP�e descriptian of the lots refers to Anoka County and needs to be changed to Ramsey County. Park de�ifcatao�a feee The required park dedication fee of $100.00 has been paid. Recommersdatioaa: Approvat, subjecfi to the contingencies stated in the attached resotution_ cc: Eric Anderson, 8021 Eastwood Road, Mounds View MN 55112; FAX: 493�3642 ��PU�A,dV i � ; AD��J: �I ��° �40 DS _ .. �.- _. �� '� �1'�._i4�"7/,.. . _ .. � � � �Y��I�� .:��; � - ._.: �=; -�. � . -:-_�:--::'_�:::�.::_=:._: =�_:==,--_�:: , �---- - .. .. .. . .. ... . .. --..�_ ... _ .. .. :._ _ .. -. �. _ : : - . ._ _ ..: _ . ` Fharre 5� �: � ��_ . _ _ � � _ i .�..� , . yP3 � � �tr�e� A�°dress, �i�r, St�a, �d �p Cad� � � � - ` � �' ._ ... , fr�ter� ��r Prag�e�#y (e,�e�k a��r��eiate boxj, . - .. .. . . -' . . , � .. � � --- _ ... x . � C7�er �f Pro�erty - _ . .. _ _... . . . .. . . � � Cerri�a� far O�e� �vve9�� . .. _. . - � Les�, Qperatar, Manager . .. �! �greemerr� t� Pus�tasa , : ., . _ -.. . . . . _. . ........ ... .. . . . . . _ Q C}tf�e� (ex�fain) ... .. �. . _ .. . ,. . . .�+ m�y E,� re�uired b�sr� 3c�1 G� �or, ot ��eaft�sy �vi� af �pt+GSrit's intetcaai ia� �t� p� . . . ... � . . _ _ : ... . thFs raq� .. . .. _. ... ,.._ . . _.. . _ . .._ ._ _ . . ...... - ..._. _.. :;. ..,. _... . . : . �� F��L��: . . : ' .. . . . _ :. :.. _ .. . . .. . _ , _: �SSr'��ii�i� LOC�IOC� Q� j �f _ • ' ; . . . �u�- v �.. ��°/%� ... CQ - � o °� �i I ° O o / ��d �esv; ip�cn ar F'rcper�y lden�tic�an N�mb��°� �i S" �r�� ,�� ,�� /'�l ,� L°y� �w�er: fd�me/Adcr�s� �.�� v,� , P�esant Us� (�:rec.4 appropeiat� hcxj; . � _ - � Unefeveian�/�laeant � ` '= � Sin f�.�ami Oab�lin ` -._..' .. _ ?. � .. _ . - 9 �1' g :� _ . - . . .. _ .....� Q �-: �upi�aclTwa Famity t3we#lang .--- :� .�; --. = .-.- -- - _� . - -. ._ ,.,.. ... _._ ,. . .,_:�,. _ � - -...- _�_,.... �t ... ... . _ .., . . . .. - :. . Mui�i-�arrriiy (N�, af Unrts �: . ) . . --- - ._ _. � �usinesslCcmmercal e,;:�lisa��rr�nt .:>:;;.: . ..� . - _ . � lnc:u�rial �aalisairrte�tr _ - . . . L� Oihe� (exffilainj • , . Pra�erty Coassm�tian: rE��IJEa I': � ,�bstaa� `�. . . _.. � i �rrr�rss °c!ea�s� nBLe: Acoiicarst may be �es.:ansscle :nr aC��arlal �eeS aS�C:at2a ��ei$t �'ie :�rtew vY �IS f�t��SL � !".��Y �� :�� '!Q� l�'°�,� r"��i�rv� � i�il Gd��!' 'r��1� i�'tt��. � � . ' SigridgLit'� �� 'nirtt� �maro�rsm��a� �COlac."�. ;rtinimutrt S°cC�. �-��Lm SY.�00 V�risnc� i�-1 �3 R-2 - i: °. yi atft� S�� C.:rse�itcr�a! Us� P�enr� n°-t � rr� - 5a'�. �i a�1� S�d(3 G�d�a ,dace�i �g ��e<a�1Sit� r�fen e�vi�sa �. ;zinimurrs t C�. .^�muxr� �;;i.� kLinor Su�ivi�r� � � � ,tilrexar S+,s�ivisiarw _ piu� a2�J c�assrc "»,ma. �!an .lmeasdma�[ �"sCa iVsctene� ,;I�r�oee ?s4m� SY� oi�s deticsrt ::aesrer3irtaa :d 5;,� '•tV�ttand vuri�r r�'grmrt 5 � {J � r!�rtntng 3iys� r�c� � �� 0 ,�L�� .aa'n�asdrrt�rvc g� �7 r �°_-, c�._ ., . r , P�rac F�r�ci l��sc��n � Q� r�:�id rs�cai�t tdtaano�e i cera � _� �� °ia r°.��i�Y �W'Yti,air �ldciticrsai �°'� r�� Ca� r� i,�cadnr ,Vumo�r � ;so _ _ c� � � tj t�� a� � qrs�t a�°.an ,��.niC'd�� CE�I� � ° — � �.�c� Individual (s} to ]adividusl (s) No delinq�ent taxes and �nsf� errcee'ed; Ceztl6cate of Real �sst�te Yalue () filed i) n� trq� c�rti�:cate olFteat Esfar�c value No. �� ----� , i 9 bY County AudilOr bepury STAi"E D�:ED TAX DLTE HER��N: S 2B0 . 50 Da�e: Ju�zs . .lq 9s (�eserved for recoeding daYa} FOitVALUABLECpPdgIDgRpTypN� Ma X. siemon a sin le erson (marn.l m.m,) , Grantm(s). ltareby Convey (5) and warra�t (s} tp Erik A. Anderson iraE pivpc�ty in Rams � . Gtanteeis), LoC 61, Spring Lnke Pask Hi11 Addition, Rameey County�utdinne��follows: �1( m0(e HPa�6 f9 DPRdE.�, p�pppg p'p baCd' � ta^-'+��r wi�h all hes�ditaments and appurtenances betonging thereto, subj�t w the following excepdons: s : _i Af�x De� Taz 5laenp Hea� s°rA� oF ��sor�. cotrN-rY oF 4�se� } �, � � Mary K. �6iemon The foregoing insnwnent rras ac�owledged bc€ore me this 25th �y oF__ Julv ,� 19 9 s � MdLV K. Siemon_ a ainr.le ,�o,-s..., ' .... �.� <, ` � �� UNbAA. MftCHELt. � _ -� ]� woraervuebc-�miriEroTa . 'R.?` svca..�,aw&o.n�w.��.M:�� , ' �'^^.^^...+•-�.. �.a 3iiMS INSIRtShffi�ITPTAS BRAfTi$A 8'Y (NAMP AND AUDRESS�: EquiCy Titie Sezvices 6800 rrance ave. South Edina, Mtd 55435 , Grantor(s). Taz Slstr�wu f� �e rcalp�e try deaeeibod iu tbia matr'amea! ahauld ta� eeat [o (Indnda namo md addrc.sa of Grmt-0o): Ezik A. rinderson 80ZI Eastwaod Road Maundsview, MN 55112 1F �1+7 j 18202 � � Y � 20_ " ...-- ..�� -�-- --- 8217 ' � 8212 j 8186 82Q5 N N c�t N 81 fl0 g� � 8142 0 820 OR 8206 8205 -.-. z ,r, � 8208 ,� � m No 8175 `° �1 Bt71 8200 ,,, c� cD v� Q K m 0.� 8180 •�;:i: _ ' Slbif m N t�y 82i10 N N N N 816rJ �` 8�{J� 81J� 8148 � �qp0� 814 8155 �� G.� 0165 8145 , 8138 Q m m �o °� °m B34 8145 ��$ ��id, 8145 87� 8135 �':.. N n c� N N 87 35 B jQ y,s� 8140 8141 8132 , -s3 ' 8121 �_�C SS32 8127 8125 8t30 813 :.. � � 811 n�n n rn � vi � rn .- u� � i` n� � i v � 8911 n o o:.: m n � � � a n c� �- o o ��n � w M N �c co �a �n �n co .. u� in v� u� � Q Bi 0'1 cv �n t� m 00 m f� t� I� I� 1� n n 8iZ �Z � � N N N N cV N:: N N N N . Of ;� 8106 � N N N N N N N tV N � N N N 1�,I .� � Y � T1Q�� N 890 � N � ^ � �n � °� 8Q80 � o � � SU99 ia g 8085 80B N N N� � S� N N Q, 8�81 N N 808$ BDi'J N N N � N � 8��6 8�85 � �� 8060 8065 8084 $Q8 8070 � 807i 8066 8071 8068 8b71 8072 807Y �72 Q 8071 8075 808 8058 8050 8055 9060 8050 9060 �� 8040 8045 8046 8045 80� 6042 8045 8 805t 044 8045 8046 8041 T�-Q 803U 803G SQ3g 8032 40 SU35 32 8037 �3B 8035 - 8025 8033 BOiO 8025 8025 8015 802 8025 8018 801Y 8000 8 2 8019 8030 � 801& 8021 8011 7984 8065 8000 8005 807 8a0g 900fi 8 0 80�1 �1� 7980 7985 8044 7981 7990 � �98Y 90 � 7989 7 96 � 7993 79`� 7377 ;I 7980 7969 79 7979 9B0 a 7985 7970 798 7975 7970y 7979 7964 7975 � ar /� �� 7964 O 7959 i970 7965 7960 7961 _ � N O � 7960 7955 y� 7966 79&S 7954 N M 795 7955 7956 ��9°�9 7g54 7959 7950 7951 7955 3 m td 7940 7945 7sas �9a7 ��V�� 7934 7933 �9�7 7940 PAR � 7945 o �a m 7950 7930 7935 7330 �� 7901° ^�: °' I � 7932 . � � o � i � � � � � 7900 7901 � N 7300 �� 901 in �n '- �°Nn , N �-�� ,o ,^y N N 7900 7901 7900 � N �a N . HILLVIEW RQAD ' �n m � q �a .:. m i 791 `~ rt � ° �'`� �� 7880 7695 � n 7840 7885 N N 7864 85 N N:: � i � , r't � ry��1 / N i88 � i89 � N N N � � ° 7861 �+ � N} 7867 7870 7869 7858 �+9 0 7876 Z 7885 7866 7853 : 7860 7B35 I n o �� 7854 7851 786U 7865 7852 w � i N � 7870 � 78n 7841 x 7850 7821 � � o , �1, ) 7863 7842 7 8�� 7850 7855 7�fi � 7829 0 o v 7801 �" � eFp 7830 a 7840 7835 784U 80 � 7851 `V N N 7791 �m -3 �8 782 0 7815 �794 7895 7'g� 7805 � ` ,, 3 R-4 ^,�ti �.�° ��a4 >s� � o �aos rrsa 7ao� °,. .... �,� n8 7781 7750 `L m e� � ry770 0 780t 7760 7797 j7758 7759 7770 I ;7748 7749 7788 77fi7 -y 773 773 7729 '� !jg ° na T72 7723 �- 773 ni Q �7z ni nis z o »> rr4a rio rr�o ��r� N �o m %b92 7fi85 N 769 7685 � 7590 � �sa `; 7fi&9 7670 7663 768 � 7b65 7660 " � �s� 7653 7647 7629 7634 �635 7&25 76Z4 7519 7600 7601 7585 7594 7575 7579 7588 � �ses �sa � �ses � �sss �s�z � �'�� 7555 7552 : � 75a5 7560 p 7550� G � 7515 75�2 n '545 7gao N � �! N SZ 7RNE _. 7a iaas I m 50 � � 0 0 __ 49 � N m 7a7� 747t 7'�7 gRQNSON •�� 45+ 7,45 I 7458 c�v o �� T�5 N N 74�ii : j 7415 74�2 7434 e � 7409 4 � �y `� 6�� 7800 7B� uz,y 77St 7750 7787 � o �-� �� 78a t w 7777 ry �°ry`O� �,� 7767 7760 � 7741 T�� 7767 p `b° 776t 7750 7731 %�3D 7753 � 7801 �� 77� T130 7721 7720 �`°� � ryh 7745 7710 7711 6 � riis � � � � _ noa N �, � R�-2 R�-2 a � N ( � N C ! R i 7F �� 7f e� �� N �hti N ��, Vicinity Map: �54-�-96 �✓ $O21 E1SkWOOC1 R08.d � Applicant: Erik Anderson _ .,�...:::;:2..::::�:'. 9� II) MINOR SUBDIVt51QN F�: �RIK ANpERSON E , � } Q : P � Q ;. � a ef � � , � �I. � � � � o � � ,I � a � � ! � I '.>l: L�7 SURV�YS C� PAAiY, INC. IAN� SURVEYaRs RECISYEREb tiNDER TAE LAAS 6F STdTE OF MiNNESOTA 7801 79ed Ave¢uo portL 812-98P-9oB9 Ias Na. g6p-9�?2 YIIItPny011e. }LIDnYaO{a SS4sS �urur��r� O2ra°tifir�tr . Regrsrcred lvnd Surneti� No, Regrstered land Survev for �- s : 401 6!. Spnng lvke Park H:!lview �s e�,- Porcels A and B ...ea _' � } _ o� , ..-..-_� H' - :; _ . °-231.0 N90°b0'00'"� � ;� _ . _ .._ - - � , , .._..'4C�... 24A L � N � I} 2G � .� m. P A R C E L ~�� hreozi ie.e R�. c�F �a . �E.= G4 2C m 2-.` I I0'�5 : � M, I�U C tl n � .. F 1.V _ tal -• -- - - ° -` --- � . .... . .. . . �.R.L. J � � J �% 6 \ /� lf. �� M �_ h ,�� 6 � i -.- • . � _� .� _,c I ii� �. . .r..' . a'• , ---- - — — —._.Z31A_ N90°00'00"E -- ----, � — � �,_~ `_-' _' _— _ _-. � _l: h�f._-_ �+ r . .. . _ vCI _ o � P A R C E L .��T S I �� m I . � 1 i �r: i ll � ;,, . _ � , - . ��r .__� . � �"^'- �-� . � � � , N I•.N'.' _. . �!Y�:I . ` I m I1 .._.... ._,- _. ° ` _�� ..'_' l___� _'_,N_ __ — ' !i%a.�...,.� _ _. . ... __ . . �--- _ -0 2si.o sso°oo'oo' w—...__. ..�..._.- ,- , � .....-5�.z ._,__._.. _, `� I-5 SPLIT �� . f:` T999 ' ��" C; . �j 44d7.? ( - Gty Couaeii Appror.l / 742-12 � I do hacby m[rF• Na1 on 4ie dn' o! . l9 , thc C'ay Cau�ci3 of lhc Cin� c i Mouad� Y'icw �n Rarauv Caunn�. Mmnoma �provca N�s resp.vurd land muvey. Mwumrni.s me a Sunxr• Naes: slwwn rn thr rcpscc� trad aurve• ud dull 6e sa e.s t6aw bew� P�aJ A snd Paroei B. aa�rdiug �o " . Mmn�saa Stmnes. Sazim SOS 02. Su6d. ]. � i. Prvaai�' Addrev: SU2 S Easeasaod Road 2. Propern� zancd R.I Rmd�unl � � ' 3. 7aa1 me:� of pvopacy � J8.1 F4 Sq. F� (p.87 Aaa) Jan� trakc. Mm�a �B� �: La 61. SP�mB Lske Perk Hillv�r+ ATTEST: Peral A-([9.tl9� Sq. FC f " Thc mth B'..5 feei � meemusd aiong thc �7 and �svllma CLud Whimg C'tn' CIa1:-ad...��.�.,�,... Idaeof oC I.a 61. SPRtNG LAKE PAR): HILLVI�V. M�da cnmty. Minees� e��g w tLs �d pin dmrmE piparm�ee� a( Propem Tuanoa Pmcl �-(19.057 Sq. Fcl Yaus p.ysbic m ihc .roa 19 w the Imd haein d�.eibod have bm� p�d eLso Ihae ue rrode}inqurm ta�ss md vansfa w�cad �hia ds� o! 19 . � Thm pm+of L.o� 61. SPRING IaKE PARK }�3..Y�W. Aaokn 4 � C"muY.Mi�otaa�gmWe�mard7dplsithowtTnog .`. .-. ...�_- . ::.��.-.-.�' - -- - ._�.�,.....-^^---�..--:_— wiah af t� mtth 8Z5 (st m m�¢oi oa ihe essa e� � � .. . .: ��.,--^�-.-{---.--�� ...: � � - ,; ti - - � p6epar , �.-. Iffi:'s�C' _- . . :.. ... . . � . �.{_''__:� �[dProperty7�alim:.:-r---' - - - - . ,. .. --'- ----.: . . ...., - . . . . . . _ �.._:�. � - - - � -_w'�.--_S` - - - :ss-- - -__- _ " _ .... _ .. � � - - - ".:r:i=^'�`a-•=e`--°"°t=�. . : �-_ '•�z,C�=': � - -' ' i'" .....^"_�_. . ' ... . . . ' _'^.. . -_ �':e�__.6_F_sc..m.a�t—r..n-..-. , - . - _ ' ' _ _ _ . ' ' - HV r. , jk�n- . ' ..... � - --., . ._. Cu.rery5arveyorCerti6rate � v��•: � . ._.. � �uau�t to M+annas Slanu�. Satiaa 367AA� iLii � kand savw 6ae 6as� ec�a�rted md is . . app�vvrd �his dsy of , 19�4 �d U�e mumoans of Minneswn 5�'�m� Se�on � '" - SOS.�, Subdivssiwi � ha.e bca fulfilkd. _, ='"- � . � - � � .r_. . . - � - � �,:...� . .. .... .; . .. . - . . . . . . .. � . .. hL^._ . . �. . . -. - ' - . .. Da�d D Cla.� R.LS. - '-- - - .' .. . . ._ . - � . . _� Cousg Su» : or a a�ibing �mlo�mation �� ae enecwea oil7� oppo�eC tuMmq _....:x;t,-. :. on ..�wouon ma �anwcuon '' - Cuunty Repmar �fTitt� Cecufica�e � Kegismr oC Ti�lrs. Camty of Rm�sn•, Su� of l�e �. menta sno�n orm irom pa[s �ol reeerd or Miom+atimi - 1�, �, �� Survc;' ��%�'' - wu filai in dtis off�x this ddx' of : ey�cnanl � _. .- � - _ . . .. - - . ._ . 19 . � o'clod�m.l�l n �t Num� ^oy certily 1n t thia � o trw� mW cm+' �t weamnlot�en o! — .�,� -�- ' r ol Lw o a oi U�a �oK � +ted ia.W a+d ��.a . . . �- � 01 m pL0.dmqm y,U ,sw�a anaoeav.w t 1 any,lrom a _r " .e�,_.� _?�SKc�ns, GP�W Rcsmd�' .. . ' "' . �. -- - �� - - - • � -�an '. _ . . . . � �K aOY�wlrvc.TH � ro� Guo '- 1,996 �.. .. . .. - .... . - � -'_- .. ' �ry. REVISED AS PER P/C � � 1 ;1. " � . � ;� � ,. _ " !�; �. -� ,�; ,, �� . •.� -,. • � � .. :�: ., �; .,`. , • • ; • . °. . , `� �i:,f' �� , �� ': �� _ � �� r ��r�. � ., , . � �� . � : � :� t ��. ��r : � �� :. .� ; ��, - � �� • ;• � �-, r �, �= �f �;�, •::� r � i "� ��,� .�' , > i� . . :, .� � . '�:�. .� � �� 7: W�REt1S, Nlr. Erik Anderson, �021 East wood Road, has requested approva! cor a minor subdivision dividing Lot 61, �pring Lak� Park Hiliview into two lots each having a width of 82.5 feet and an area of approximatety 19,05� squar� feei; and, ` �REAS, fhe Plannin� Commission has reviewed fih� applicant's request for a minar subdivision and has detemuned tha�t it is in conformance with Chapters 1201, 1202, I 104 and 1204 of the Municipal Code; ar�d, �II-�ERE�S, the appIic�ni has paid the required park dedication fee in the amaunt of $100.00. NOW, THEREFQRE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commissio� - recommends approval of the minor subdivision request rnade by Erik Anderson, 8021 Eastwood Road, contingent upon the following: Prior to transmittal of ttzis cas� to City Council for actiony the applicant provide the fotlowing: a. Evidenc� of ownership of the property b. A revised iand survey changing the references to �noka County to Ramsey County, and adding a note which states: "Utility and drainage easements have been dedicated by a separate recarded easement dated and recorded at c. �,. docurnent dedicating the utility and drainage easements shawn on tha land survey, wtuch is acceptable to the Cifiy Atfomey as to form, and has been executed by the applicant. 2. Prior to sigr�ature of the mayor on th� fand surv�y, �he appiicant shai� have removed ihat portion oithe d�iveway which encroaehes into the drainage and utility easement. -- Planning Comn�ission Resolution 472-9b September 4, 1996 Page 2 3. The City Council resolution of approval, the land survey and the drainage and utility easement be recorded with Ramsey County within si�y (60} days of final adoption, and present proof of such recording to ihe City of Mounds View, or this approval shall be null and void. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View Pianning Comrr�ssion directs stafi to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes. Adopted this 4th day of September, 1996 ATTEST: (SEAL) Jerry Peterson, Chairperson 1Vlounds View Planning Commission Pamela Sheldon Community Development Director i�� ;�� Y, � ��;£R�. , �;1�� ! .. , . � �,�. ;,Y, , � i %i � �i r� � i: r'� �`��",,;_ �. : f= ` �� .i� �� ': .1� '��. �: � ; .,. �. �. 1��. � � 1 '`> � _ :��; ��, ; � ; f- ". �; �+. ' ;, �� ;i; �� !-� ` �,►� � �� 1` ��.'�, �: f;' ",: � ., 1" , ` f- .. ��. . :�: � � �, , �. � .� . �; ��. : �. il� :f"� �' ; . . � �,� , :�. �: �� " .: 1'�- �� ' �. ," C � ' '_ �; ', � :.: . � , • l, . • . :�, ; � � � 1 .'' # �: ;1; I��TI�S �W PI.AI�1�tG CA�E I��: 454�96 �REAS, Mr. Erik Atiderson, 8021 East wood Road, has requested approval for a minor subdivision dividing Lot 6i, Spring Lake Park Hitiview inio two lo�s each having a width oi 8�.5 feet and an a�rea oiapproxirnately 19,057 square feet; and, �� ..,, ,r,j,,. WHEREAS, ihe Planrung Commission has review�d the applicant's request for a rrunor subdivision and has determined thai it is in conformance wiih Chapters 1201, 1202, 1104 and 1204 o�the Municipal Code. '� NOW, THEREFORE, BE Ii° RESQLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends approval of the �ninor subdivision request made by Erik Anderson, 8021 Eastwood Raad, contingent upon the following: Prior to transmittal oithis case to City Councii for action, the applicant provide the foiiawing: a. � Evidence of ownership of the properiy A revised land survey ckanging the references to Anoka County to Ramsey County, and adding a note which states: "Utility and drainage easements have been dedicated by a separate recorded easement dated and recorded at A docuznent dedicating the utility and drainage easernents shown on the land survey, which is acceptable to the City Attorney as to forzn, and has been executed by the applicant. 2. Prior to signature of the mayor on the lancf survey, the appticant shail have removed that portion of the driveway which encroaches into the drainage and utilify easement. Planning Camznission �esolution 472�96 September 4, 1996 Page 2 3. Tlze City Cauncil resolution of approval, the land survey and the drainage arrd utility easement be recorded with Ramsey County wiihin si�y (60) days oifinal adoption, and present proof of such recording to ihe City of Mounds View, or this approval shall be null and void. BE IT FURTHER RESOL�/ED that the Mounds Vgew Planning Commissia�r directs staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior io approval of the minutes. Adopted this 4th day of September, 1996 Jerry Peterson, Chair�erson Mounds View Pianning Commission �.TTEST: =` ` (SEAL) P�amela Sheldon Community Development Director ' �; 1 .1 J�� ; � ,�� ; i�:. J�.: � �, 1 91. _' !. '- f '° � ;1; '�; ::, ' � ; .i . � `, '� ,f.l`� `� ' �_ ;�� ,,. Regular Deleetiri� Sep�ember 4, 199F IVlounds 'View City Hall 24d1 I�'ighway 10, �Lounds `Iiew, �iN 551I2 The Mounds Vieva Pl�nning Cornmissios� wa.� called to order hy Chair Petersan ai 7:11 p.m. MEMBERS P SENT: Commissioners Mitter, Brooks, Tohnsion, Stevenson and �h�ir �etersor�. (Comrr►a�sioners �rasaemle and Obert had �xcused absences.) �; AI,SO PRES�: Communityy DeveloQment D�rector ' Pamela Sheldon, Ciiy Attorney I3ob Long and Reco�ding Secretary T'amara Saefke. `; Commissioner Miitler noted some corrections to ihe Aug�ast i, 1996 Minut�s. Fage 4, 3rd paragraph should be changed to read ". .. fact that the main office fo� the I�de�v Apos�olic Cl��rct� i� located. ..'° Also page 5, fourth paragraph should be changed to re�d ". ..however, ihe �ate would be controlled." 1Vlotion/Second: iVliller/Yohrision to approve the minutes of August 7, 1996 �� A�er�dedo 5 ay�s 0 na.ys 'Th�re vdere no citiz�n r�qr�esis or comrr��n#s from the 1. Catl to order 2. I�oll Cali 3. Approval of M"inutes: August 7, 1996 i�l[ation Carried 4. Citizen Requests andfloor. Comments Frorn the Floor Cornmuniiy I7evelopmeni Direcior �heldon inforrned 5. FIar�riin� Case Na. th� comrnissioz�ers that fhis request was for � m�or 454F96 subdivision for property located �t �02I Eastwood Roa.d. Mo�ands �Iiew 1�Ianning Comrr�ssior� Reg�alar Meetir�g 'The prop�rh� o�mer, Eri�c Anderson, is requesting that this property be split urto two lots. Ms. Sheldon explained that at the last discussion session, there were some items of cor�cern, however alI of these have since been resolved (util�ty e�sernent, evidence of ownershsp}. Stafi"s recommendation would be that ihe Pla�uung Comr�vssion recommend approval af tk�is subdivision to ihe City Council via Resolutian I�o. 472-96. Commissioner St�venson noied that in past cases, the resoluiian o� the application refers to a Pack l�edica�ion Fe�. H� f�lt it perhaps should be included ira this Resolution. �Is. Sheldon stated per iheir request she would add � paragraph to the Resolution to reflect that the applieant has paid the �100 fee %r Park Dedication. Moiion/Second: Stevenson/Brooks ta Approve R�soluiion No. 47'2-96, Iteeommending Approval of a�°inor Subdivision for Erik Anderson, 8021 Eastwaod Road, as Amended. 5 ayes 0 nays Bill Diem of Stai�l Consiruction was present. He distributed revised plans to the Commission mesnbers and staff. Community Development Director Pameta Sheldon expla.ir�ed that this application was to allow for the construction oia 2,054 square foat church facility to be iocated at 3025 County Road H. Sh� noted that the application b�fare ihe comrnission consisted of three parts: a varianc� request for the front setback atong County Road I3, the request for a Conditional LTse Permit to allow the constru�tion of � ehurch facility, and a developrnent reviev�. �'he applican� is the Stahl Cons�naction� Compan.y, or� �epternber 4, 1996 Pag� 2 Motion Carried b. Plar�ning Case No. 452-9b 'i ,i r �Iounds �I�ew Pta.�ning COmrnisSior► Regtttar iVi�etin� behalf' of the I�e�r �iposiolic Church. Ivis. Sheldon explaaned thai th� variance requesi requires a Public Notice before Yhe Pl�nin� Commission can make a decision. The notice for th� �epterrtber 4th meeting was not publish�d, therefore a decision in re�ard to the variance cannot be made until the S�piember 18th meeting. The Piaruiin� Commission cat� however, rev�ew the request for ih� Cond�tional Us� Pemiit and ihe De�vel- opment R.evrew. Ms. 5heldon expla.ir�ed th� requirements for a�onditional us� permii for property Iocat�d �t arc �-1 district, including church use. She noied that the application currently does not meet the froni yard setback requiremenis of 3 5 feet. The applicant has requested a va.rianc� to addres� the front s�tback. Tn regard to screenitrg requiremenis, it appears that the revised pIar� provides ampl� buffering beiween ihe parkin� lot and the adjoinirtg proper�ies rf it were just to meet requirements estabGshed for pernutted uses. For cond��ional use permits, th� Planning Com�nission and City Council do hav� the ability to detern�i�e whether or no� the width is enough to provide adequate bu�eriz�g. Conditior�s car� be appli�d to provide greaier y�rd setbacks if �� is felt necessary in order to make the use compatibi� r�rith iis adjacent property uses. In a survey of buffer areas %r other Mounds �ew �hurches, the raaige of buf%r is betvaeen 14 arid b3 feet (church parking lots and residences). The typical distance is about 29 to 31 feet. ihe parking lot as propased provides for seven compact parking spaces along the north prop�rty line. If the bu�ering is provided as proposed, depending upon haw far �he cars pull up u�ta ihose spaces, there may b� only five to sev�n feet iePt unobstrucied in the drive aisle behind them. �Is. Sh�ldon r�ferred to a Ietter she received feom the �iaine/�pring Lak� 1'ark/I1�founds �I'iew Fire Dep�rtment wiuch address�d the drive aisle. They recorf�mend thai a miz�imum of 20 feet be kept open in t�s area whic� poses a sigriific�t constraini. However, th� Fire Marshall ha� stated that if the building had a spa�inl�l�r system, they m�y be ahie to appraa� a r�arrower driveway. 'The� main concerri is thai they ne�d enough width to keep th� fire truck away frort� the building in the �vent ihai ita� 6�ilding callaps�d (which would be less Sepiember 4, 1996 P�ge 3 �o�nds �Iiew �lanning Commisston Regular Mee�in� likely if ihe building had a sprrYnnkler sysiem), l�%s. Sheldon noted that ihe buffering as proposed is reatly less than typical, and it would b� reduced if the pazkin� spaces in #hat area were m�de functional. - �Is. Sheldon reoted that as proposed, five of the parkin� spaces aze Iess than th� ciiy's normai requirement (9` X 20'). They c�arren�ly measure 9° X 18'. Th�re is also a 17 foot drive aiste along the e�st side oith� property behind the firsi bay of parki�g and that drive aisle is r�oi sufficier�t for cars #o back up. Iv1s. �heldon noted there is room, l�owever ta move one bank of p�rking over to achiev� the 23 f�et needed in order for the cars ta b� able to back up. In order to brin� the parldr►g spaces into compliance with the city's requiremeni, some of the buffer wauid need to be r�duced. 3he sug�ested the Pla.ruv�i� Cora�rnission cor�sider wheiher the numb�r of parkin� sg�ces provided is adequat� a�d also the faci thai the numt�er of compaci spac�s is Iarger thar� the 10°/a allowed (they currently propose sev�n spaces). In regard to the requiremenis for a Condiiional Use Pernut, the city must consider the cor�rpatibility between adjacent uses and this �roposal, the amount of screening, anci whether or not there witl be adverse aff�cts on ad}aceni residential properiies. Ms. Sheldon stated stafi sees ertough dimensional problems on the site that they quesiion whether a church aithe size praposed fits. If the proposal were %r a srnalter church, they may be able to achieve the parking requir�ments atid provide suiiicien� buffering. Ms. Sheldor� noted that the Commission may need to detern�ine how they see the proposal relatin� to the Comprehensive Plan. In regard to the zoning, she naied that the neighborhood consists ma�ly of oversized lats with law ir�t�rrsity artd one af the ch�racieristics of this partic�alar plan is ihat it vvould be a m�ach more intensive use of'the lot. Ii is staffs v�ew that it is dif�cult tio meet the inient o£t�� zoning district (R-1, �ingie F'amily) wiih this size facility. VJith respe�t to th� Conditiorral LFs� Permit9 siaff vaot�ld recomm�nd that the Plannix�g ComYnissgon recorr�mend 5ep�emb�r 4, 1996 Page 4 ,'; ;, � l i�ounds tl�ew Pi�nnin� Cornmission Re�utaz Meetin� �ep��b�r 4, 1996 Pa�e 5 to ihe City Council that ii be derued. Ivls. Shetdon noted that r�he purpose of the Developrne�t Iteview is to check th� plari to see iiit meets the dimensional requirements of the code. T'he areas vvhere the proposal fails Yo meet the requuements are as fallows: 1) the front setback 2} number of parking spaces - they have provided 30, r�hey need 31 and of those i0%, or 3 spac�s, can be compa�t. NIs. Sheldon si�ted sta.�°feeIs thai ii is d�t�ali to accomtnodate the sizes of the parking lot and the buil�ding on ths sit�, so the plans have been designed wiih more compa� spaces. �here is also a pz°oblein with th� iength o€the spaces. Ther� is a p�oblem with the drive aisle on the north side of the 6uilding. With regard io signa�e, the code does not provide much guidarrc� for churches in residential d;stricts, so staff has used the neigitborhood business disirict as a�taide. That district allows for 100 square feei of'si�nage. The current propasal shows 115 squaze feet. 5iaff would � also suggest that any lighting be at a very Iow 1eve1 a�d turned off at a certain time each nigh�. The li�hting for the parking Iot as proposed wouid be building mounted on the north and east sides and wouid shine out on the parlan� lot. Siaff is somevvhat concemed about it shining out into the yards of the adjacent homes and would recornmend �hat lighiing be put on the perimeter of ih� lot so it wo�ald shirle inward. Siaf�recommended denial of the D�velopment Revi�w, based on the fact that soine of the dimensional requirements have noi been mei and they do not see ae� �asy way to achieve them. lVfs. �he(dora noted two leiYers which she distributed to th� Commi�sioners: one froan th� Fire Departmeni and on� fram Paul Ostrow who represents 1VIr. and �°s. NToon, expr�ssin� concem about wheiher or nat ihe projeci meeis the criieria and thai it would hav� serious irnpact o� the cli�nt's propert�. �iounds �Izew Plar�run� Cornmiss�ort mi Regula.� liileeting iVlr. �h7illiam I)iem, Project 1l�fana�er of Sta.ht Constrnactio�, respond�d io the concerns �xpressed by Ms. 3heldo� as follaws: 1) The Fire Depa�tment infarmed him thai as tong a�s th� church �ad �. sprinkler system and thai the structure was �vitlun (at the further point. of the biaildin�} 150 f�ei o�' a fire hydrani, adequat� protectian woutd be provided �o the building. The farthest point of the building from t�e fire hydrant is less �han 150 fe�t. .(The 20 foot wide access road was requi�ed if �he buiIciin� were constnacted withou� a spzinkler system.) The spainker systexn� must be desig�ed by a licensed co�xtractor, and submitted for approval to the Ciiy. That is why ihe system is not shown in the informational packet. This would be subr�itted pziar �o the start of construction. Ie�r. ]7iem explaia�ed that this facility, sinc� it is the firs� of its proiotype, has gone through some desi�n c}ian�es to allow for the handicapped p�rson in a wheelchair. What they are now proposing is to eli.mxnate one or two of the rear pews to allow for wheelchair space. This will reduce the permanent seating capacity. Mr. I�iem provid�d detailed informaiian in regard to the "r�vised" praposal whieh he disiributed ai the mee�in� of the Plannin� Commissiora, noting ihe gen�ral layout of ihe facility. 2} The entrance width is a full 22 feet with a five foot radius curb cut. 3) The parking stalls are 20 feei long, �vvith a 23 foot center aisie, and 20 foot parkin� stalls abuYtirtg the chtarch. Mr. I3iem suggesting that the Commission review the parkin� lot requirements, as MNDOT only requires an 1� foot spaee and they requi�� 22 feet for the drive aisies. 4) T°he new pi°oposai reflec�s or�iy three compact pa.�king spaces which �s v�tivr� the 10% limit. (Iv�.l7ier� stat�d 5ept�mber 4, 1996 Pa�e 6 ; .; i j I�ounds �Iie�r Planr�n� Cornr�ssian Reg�alar Nleetin� Sept�rnbe�° 4, 1996 Pag� 7 �t the last Piannang Corrirnis�tan m�etu��, he w� �formed that they could have up to 20°/a of tkx� spaces fa� compaci ca.�s.) The proposal shows tha� ihe depth frorn the point of the stripirig ta curb liaie is at 19 feet {aa;ival is 19'4"). This is �'° from the ord°uiance requireme�ts for standard partan� sialls. Ev�n if a car were not parked so that its ti�e were flush a�ainst the curb, eleven fee� would still be �vailable for a Sre truck to pass tiirougi� which is their mFnimum req�°emer►t. 5) The new prop�sal ir►ctudes 31 parkin� sialls. 6j The ord°u�arice requzres screenirig of at least 5 feet. This can be provided by installing a fence or hy installing trees and landscaping. They hav� pro�ded for a tera foo� �uffer with the instaila#io� of plantings ia provid� a vari�ty of color to be �njoyed by th� adjaining proper�ies as weil. The plantixig� as proposed vvould be �iaggered witl� some of th�m b�ing fast-�rowingy to provide sufficient scr��ning. Ivlr. I7iem explained that upon Plaa�ning Commission approval, they u�ould propose to �xtend the landscaped area alang the east property line. 7) They meet the requirerrient of the 3a %ot sight triangle at the sou�hwest comer of the property. Theq stiti intend to keep as many of tt�e oa� and ch�rry trees as possible. The new plan depicts a 22,500 square foot siie. Ofthis i3,429 square feei will be impeivious surfaGe. The green space has increa�ed to 9,071 squar� feet (they are ai 40.4i% green space which �xceed� most cities' requirem�nts by I4%}. In surmmary, for the Cor�ditior�� iTse �er�tiit, they have complied with the five foot bu�er requi�emeni from th� p�rkir�g �ode. Mr. J�ier� r�oied tha4 they novv compl� vvith the follo�g 1l�ou�ds �1'�evd Planni�� Cor��issi�a I�egtalar IVleetird� Dimensior�al Requirements �or the �evelopmen� Re�riew: lot area, loi vv�dth, biaildin� hei�ht, sid� 1au�Id°u►g setbac�CS, rear huilding setbacks, parking iot s�tbacks, paekin� space requireYnents �c maximum compact car spaces allov�ed. The fou� spaces which previously were proposed to be compact spaces for a total of seven, aze fractions �om ordinanc� requuements. Commissioner St�ver�son cornment�d that h� would like to s�ve any questions he may have uratil the ne� meetirig as he, alon� with t�e oth�r commtssioners and staff, had just received copies of th� neva proposal and h� has noi had adequate iime to detem�ine if ihe questions they had have ali bee� addressed satisfactorily. A discussion follewed in regard to the iime limi�s established by State Law as ta the length of tim� allowed beiween ih� submittal of a proposal to the decision dat�. The noamallimit is 60 days, wluch can b� extended by the ciiy ai it� discretio� %r an additiona160 days. 3f no decision is made by th� Ciiy Caunci� by then, it is considered approved with no aetion iaken. The applicarrt can determine if they want tco extend the time. Ms. Sheldon noted that 60 days from the date of the application (July 15, 1996) would be September 12, 1996. The applicant has been sent a letter not�g thern thai the City is exicending the review time for an additiona160 days ar to November 11. Mr. Long, City Attomey, noted that tl�e criteria under 1106.04 �oted that the front yard setback can b� no tess thari 35 feet. The appiicant is praviding only a 30 foot setback. I�e wondered if the ch�arch would be able to be built to comply with the 35 foot front setback requirements. Mr. Di�m noi�d thai ihe church could be built with a 35 foot front yard setback, however the buf%r on �he north wouid need to be adjusted �iown io five f�et (this buffer ar�a was a poin� of discussion at the la.st Pla.a��in� Corramassian meeting ar�d the proposal was b�sed upon inp�a� firom that discussion). ComaYUSSioners Jol�sion noted that at the last meeting, input from residents result�d in the Cam�riissioners feelirigs th�t a 10 foot bu�°er urould provid� a betier buffer to ti�os� Septernber 4, 1996 Pa�e � , � `, ', ; :, ;;>; <; Ivlaunds V�ew Plannirig Commission Septernber 4, 1996 ; 1Z�gralar 1Vleeting Pag� 9 resideniial properties abuttin� �he church property. Corrimissioner �'eterson asked aboui the grad�rtg along th� backside in the Northeast comer arid if b�aildin� biocks wauid be included as initial�y proposed. �. i�iem �►oted that 6y movin� the cu.�blan� in fiv� feei, it creates a natural contour, so �he water contaanmerrt and the exiting is controlled. IVo reta.inii'� vvall is needed. In regard io co�tcern� of residents in r��gard io property value of neigl�boring properties, �. l�iem stated they had an independent �ealior survey the neighborin� properiies adjacent to some of the churches i� Mounds View and they found that the average price differenc� per square fooi of the buildin� did not chan�e �ore than �.50 per sqcaare foot. 'They found that in 50% of th� cases, th� nei�hbora�g properties wer� hi�her in value i4�a.n the properkies on the other side. Rochelte Nfoon, b929 �leasant �iew Drive, commented that the survey did not likely include any property which had a parkin� lot as close as what ihis would be io their property.. Cominission�r �iiiller asked what the actual size of the parking spaces is for the new proposal. IV�r. Diem c�oted that ihey are 9' � 20' alon� the east area. The fve spaces to the North are shor� by 8". Commissioner� Peterson not�d ihat the spaces on the Norih indicate one comer af the car �xi�ndin� over the curb. IVis. Shetdon stated, in briefly reviewxng ihe new plan, th� parking spac�s East af the chtarch az� at the corre� size. The on�s aiong the Nortl� side (compact) are still short 6" in width. Therefor�, th�y v�ould noc be in compli�nce with the cade. 'The �n�ie oii�� parlcin� makes it difficult to deterrnine code complian�� as no �uidanc� for r��as�� th�s� spaces is provided. Sh� �ai�d the �sua� vaay of �ae�suring iviounds �iew Planrung Co�nmissior� Regular ii�eeiin� these spaces. Rochelle Mooa�, 6929 Pleasant Vjew Driv�, cornmented that one af the criteria in a Conditaonal Use Pertnit is t�ai It-1 is tow intensity. �Nhen a parkang lot is designed the way ihat this one is proposed t� allova more spac�s to fi�, it indicates that they are trying to sque�ze toa much on tocs small of � lot. There£ore, one has to de��rmiiie whether or nat this is � appropriate use for the property. Sieve Bord�n, 3009 Coranty I�oad F�., siated oae of ihe cri$eri� is that the proposed structure will not have art adverse affect �pon th� neighboring resfdential prop�r�ies. I3e beli�ves thai a parkin� lot next to the neighborin� yards will h�ve an adverse affeci o� their properties. He beiieves it vvilt ha,ve an adverse a.ffect ora potential sale of his property in #he future. IVIY°. Diem, in respons�, siated aII of the chan�es they have made to the plans have not b�en to change the design or scope of ihe projeci to fit the ordinane�. it has bee� to tryy to appease the neighbors. It is to try to make ihe property as beau�iful as possible. Bariaara� Cloues, 2875 Couniy Rd. � asked if the chnarch members, after learning how many changes were needed just ta comply with requirem�nts, felt perhaps the si�e was not adequate. Donald Kratt, 1437 76th l�venue N.E. Fridley, stated tiie majority of the changes have cam� about due to their attemp�s to appease the neighbors. Rochelle Moon, 6929 Pleasant `liew I7rive, stated there is nothing in i�ae proQosal that is af benefit to her. Without the variance, the buffer would need to be reduc�d to five feei vahi�h the Planning Commission agre�d i� not adequate. Nfr. Diem noted ihai the ord°uiance all��rs for bufferis�g either by f�ncin� ar by landscaping and they vvo�aid tmeet ih� five foot requirement with a fence. In regard to a disceassion about gr�ntir�g a variar►ce for a proposal �epteiraber 4, 1996 Pag� 10 'j Ailo�nds Viev�r PIa1�� Comr�ssion Regular Meeting 5eptember 4, 1996 Fag� 11 wl�ach couid b� constructed wiihout or�e, Mr. L,o�g oi�ered the follor��: iJnder 1106.04, ihe Plar�nirj� . Commission would r�e�d to find that th� prog�sal rn�ets th� setback req�a�remenis unless fihere is a hardship which justifies � variance �the proposal does not meet ihe front setback ai this time). IJnder section 1125.02 of the code in regard to granting variances, the hards�p musi be on th� o�vzzer of th� land ar ihe applicant and not a, hazdstup to ihe adjacent properties. IVIs. �heldon stated the Co�nmiss�oners must %�ep in mind that if th.e buildi�xg mei the sei�ack requirement�, wouid it be possibl� to meet the buffering and parking lot requirements? M[r. Diem showed changes �ha� wer� m�de to th� original landscaping plan. Th� focus of their a�tex�tion has been ta ihe area abu�ting �/ir. �/Ioon's praper�y. Addi#ionatly, if " the two pews in the back of the buildisig are remov�d, �he :- i number of parking spaces coutd a�so be reduced. A�Ir. Dan ivloon, 6929 Pleasant View I3riv� stated ti�e pian wouid be able ta meei all of the requiretnents if the applicant reduced the size of the building. With a Conditional Use Pernut, the Planning Commission has the right to tell ih� �ppiicant thai the building is too iarge for the p�ccel of land. He kriow� af other praperties that would be more suitable for a church. He feels thai a parkuig lot so ciose to his properiy will depreciate the vaiue of his home. Furthermore, it does not fit within the �onditional Use Pemut requirements. Commissioner �/iiller stated she wouid be in�erested in followin� up with proposing a smaller structure. �he wondered how th� size of the proposed buiiding was detemiined. li�Ir. Diem stated it was based upor► the current n�amber of parishion�rs wiih �rowth taken into considerat�on as well as adolitional space in the event of vaeddings and funera]s. Commissioner Johz�ston stated the Fue Mar�hall requires a 2� foot wid� access road, � docurnent�d in his leit�r to M�. Sheldon. �ounds Vievd Planrurag Cor�ssion Regular Meetu°�� 5epternber 4, 199b Page 12 IVIi°.17iem has mentioned ihat a 12 foo� driv� is acceptcable if°ihc bualding is pravided r�riih a spaYnkier systerr�. �rie would lilce this inf'ormation verified. Mr. Diem stated he would a.iso like the Fire 1Vlarshail to verify that ihe width of the driee aisle �s really not an issue if ihe farthest pa.r� af the building is within 150 feet of a fire hydrant. He siated th�y would also be willi�� ta provide a siamese hydraa�t in the com�r. Barb Croues, 2�'�5 County I�oad F�, asked aboui snow rernovai and stated her concem that storage of it on the site would a�eci the nuinber of par�Cing. spa�es available. I�ir. Diem sta�ed if this wa,� an issue, tchey would have st removed from ihe site. Commissioner Miller stated she would like to l�ow if twio parking spaces are removed on the north side, could the remainder be mad� into pazallel parkin� spaces? Chair Peterson stated he fee�s the main canc�m i� ihe size of the lot for the praposed use, however many oiher i�sues of concem have been addressed as welt. Overall, he wouid admii that the revis�d proposal is much more acceptable ti�an beFore. A discussion aros� as to whether the Comrnissioners would Iike to see two different plans at th� next meeting: one takirig into account a five fooi variance and one witho�at ihe variance. Commissioner Stevenson stated he really could not see a reason to submit � pl�n wiih a variance, however the choice is the applicant's. IVi ti�_.�on/Secp�. N�iller/Johnsion to table the request for the IVew Apostolic Churcia �antil the September I�, 1996 meeting. 4 ayes 0 nays (Brooks was eaccused frorri ihe meetirig) �otion Carried <:1 � - -:-.;'J _1 Mounds V��vv Plar�n� Comrrr�ssiora itegular 1�/leetixig �ep�ember 4, i 996 Page 13 Tils. 3h�Idon noied that she had rec�iv�d �, request from � resident for a change to ihc city'S zoning code. This request pergair►s ta parking lot s�tbacks between residential and non�re�idential uses. 7. �'lanning Case �%. SP-00�-96 ivfr. Mooa has requesied ihai a provision be added �c� ihe code tha� would requi�e thai where ihere is non-residential uses ia' a residential district, the paridng iot associated vaith thase uses b� at least 15 feet from #he property line and that the area be rxsed for landscap�ng aaid buffering. Nls. 3heldott x�oted thai on� must also take inta �onsideration how a change su�h as this would affect exisiin� churches. It appears that most of �he e�cistin� church�s would meei the 15 foot proposed requirem�nt. '�'he Planning Commissi�n must detemiine whether it should be fifteen feet o� more than �fteen feei. 3he wo�d recomrnend that it be based somevahat on �he siz� of ihe site and that an ailowance be mad� for existin� pa.ricin� lots to remain but if ih�y are ever recor�structed, they would need to be brought into can#'orrnance. Ms. Sheldon noted that code allows arry property owner in Mounds View to uutiate an amendment. Another issue thai the Commissior�ers may want to look at also deals with zninimutt� lot size required far these types of faciliiies. Com�nissioner �iiller staied she would like to discuss ihe changes iurther �d wou(d also like to see what impact a chaxig� like iius wouid have on existing buildings and schoois. Comrnissioner �tevenson stated he woutd like a survey completed to see what oiher cities' ordinar�ces are with regard to setbacks. NIs_ Sheldon stated she ha� pr�pared an 4rci�nance and Resolutior� in regazd to the requested am�ndm�r�ts for ihe Commission�rs' consideraiion_ She nated th�t part of th� reason she wanted to pr�s�nt this infarmatior� at t�s time is that it does have som� relationship to the other case �nd sta.ff did not want to preve�� it from movin� forward. Discussion or� this car� b� sch�duled info ; ; ? � Mo�nds Vievv Plannin� Comrnissaon IZegular �ieeting the September 18�h meet�g, if the comrrussior�ers so des�°�. Chair PeterSOn siaied there w�.s some c�iscussion at th� last meeting and it was felt that it wouid not be appropriate to apply ordinance changes to those applications already in process. Motion/Second: Miller/Joluistan to continu� the discussion of Plasuzin� Case #SP�000�-96 at �he Septesnber 18, 1996 m��ting. 4 ayes 0 �ays liiis. Sheidora noted that this iteraa was strictly a follow up for ih� Planning Comr�ussion. The cammission has alr�ady passed on their recommendations that this be approved by the City Council. The changes io the Flood Piain Zoning are being requested by the Depart�ment oiNatural Resources to keep the city irt compliance w�ih the �ederat Emergency Management Agency's about Fload Plain Zones. The resolution will merely reconfirm their recammendaiion oi approval for revislons. Mo�ionlSecand: Miller/Johnston to Approve R�solution No. 473-96 as atnended. 4 ayes 0 nays NIs. Sheldon nated ih� iiems which will be on the Agenda for the 3eptember 1�, 1996 meetir�g. Ch�it P�terson noted ihat Garq Stevensoa a.nd Bobhi� Brooks had excused absences irom the August 21, 1996 agenda m�eiing. �Ii others were present. Sep�em6er 4, 1995 Page 14 �Iation Can°ied �. Planning Case I�io. �P-002-9fi Revision io �lood Pla.� �o�ing I�otion Carried 9. Report af Staff 10. Itepori oi Chair .'i ii�iounds VBev�r Planivn� Commissgar� R��alar I�eeiing September 4, 1996 Pa�� 15 There being no fiarther busiriess befor� the Pianni�g 1 I. Adjourrunent Comrrussao•rt, Cl��,ix Petersor� adjoumed the gneeting �t 10:27 p.rr►. �sespectiully submitted, i . ' � �. Pamela Sheldora �ommunity Develapme�t I�irector ,'1 ,� , _ ��LL�-I� 1`1 l � C �� IVIOUNDS VIE'�T CITY C , � � �/9��, � f �.�. � � a .� ; � � 4,v I,��L i t �. /'� i . � � i: � �� J 7 ��L�I' ��> � ? f -� ��`... !�i� �2�� - �� _�mY � � �Jti ��,� .1 i . �1 �I �, ".-�ti /?.� -, n _ ��c( �n/,��,� Please sign __ I 'ADDRESS � ��!�-7 f� ✓ / �07�� (!'t� /�r �� / C! � .0 /s/� ,'��! <C ��i : r � 4-.'�� h �� f� o�s �� r�� t e r�r� t�i s�`-�= ��// p U�i/� t/, �41/� �/ 11v' C� O/� �� NI� 5 S-o l/ , � ,'t //D .;,t i� SS � ✓ �'�5 ��Il��r�� E l�. �5 ��r! �; / -S��J!� �/ � ��s72 6� !� �� /'✓! �% `J S % / � - r �� ' � 7 ,� % ��J ' �� ,°rJ ; /�-t�( f°9 �l�a • v J �CJ �f'r� '� �� F C? F�'v!/t�U'i i (��i �X�Gi/�li✓/( � /%�/r JJ �� -. �`� �ct�;c��,,'�' 9�"( ia_ 1��v SS4��rI � � �� y' ��.. � c��, �' u. � � 10�..- �' ' �w ��. /f% �� '�� .�'�z G, � �� / L� ~ � � � '� J /J ,%_` I�r� � 1 l �(� ��,0 b1 \ r' i P t`��1 �ll �� _7 I f� � 7`� C� /t/�� , � h f� ssr/� ; . �e�� 6 Z��',f ,�—v-��u-1 t,�'��i - ✓ � � -/� ,� % 6 � . � cle��. r. %�%; �, .,, s �. l0 �o l ��-�ss �� 2 . /�/� , � .�3 �- . , r � ,�� l2� f't� ��Gw /�� ° ,G �� SJ`l J � ; �►� a. � � _ ��' , ti �� ` � _' � �- �� _,, � _ '." � � � � :. , '' �"► �i�' _ �.� -' � � � ' - ��, " • - i." ► , � � r �� R �� _ • •. - '� "�. ' � - , � -�.� �. - .: y i f * • � ♦ r , d _ � .. � , w: � . . • i :� � � ^ ' � ` • � .* . } . � • � �, � �.. �° � �� . � _ , � � �� F w * �� _ a v;n �' _ - . . . .�:. � �.. i � � �, i ' . f .. • • '. *i-_ _ -• _:'., ' , ti Y � � �, ,. � � . � - � � �� . � r_ * � . � . • :, ^� _ Communiiy Developmen# Dir�ctor Sheld�rt reviewed fihe requesg from iY�e i�Aounds Vie�✓ Economic Development �4uthority for a reduction in fhe required width f�r a comer loi. She explained that the required width is i o0 f�ef and the request i� for the ioi to b� �Q f�e4 for the property at 82fi5 Spring Lake Road. She ccsntin�aed by �taiing that 4he app(icant ha� applied to ihe Planning Commission by ie�ter outlinir�g their r�asons they feel there ig a ��rdship in this c�ase and she pres�nted the s�ammarized information to fih� Pianr�ing Commissio� in a report. She explained thai ii�e most signifcant iterr�s from the variance criteria �ave to do with th� loi being piafifed in � 9�9 a4 its curreni width ar�d added that there i� no additionaf unplatted �r vacant Eand c�n thai bloc� thai co�[d b� purchased io �dd to this lot to widen it Dir�ctor Sheldo� �o�ed t��re is suffici�nt I�nd vvithir� th� lot �o creat� a �. C�II #o Order � ! . .- r . . ._ � � s � �, --., • . r �� .' R . ' ''�. ...� _. - ,. !- - .� , � :. . � • -�_, � _ . _ - . ,: • . �� !._- ' � � 1� �` �- -- � buildable area for a�ingle family horr�e, and if the variance is not granted ihi� loi v�ould be i�eld vacant because they �,rould be unable to gef a building permit. She co�cluded by recc'mmending ihat #he requesi be appro�ed based on the fact that it is not actions on the part of #he appiicant that has c�used fhe problet� and unless the �ariance is granfed they will not be able fio use 4he !ot for iis typi�l purpose in an R-1 di�tric# a�d ihai they oughi io be abfe io build a single family hom� on th�ir prop�r#y. Dir�ctor �h�idon noied ihat � resolufiion had been prepar�d appro�ing ihis varianc� request and indicated �ha# Jennifier Bergrnan, represeniing the Ni�unds Vievv Econot�i� Development Authority, w��s presen�. It was n�ied by Direetor S�eldor� that th� purp�se af this r�quest i� to d�mofish the existing house and construct a n�w one as p�rfi of �he City's Housing Replacemenf Program and to market the 1ot. Chair Peterson sfated that this ifiem was discussed a� their previous agenda rneefiing. Nlaiion/Secand: Stevensor�/Brasaemie to adop� Reso{�tion �lo. 477-96 approving a lot wridth variance request by ihe Mounds i/iew� Economic Development Authority far 8265 Sprin� Lake Road, Planning Case iVo. 455-96. Corrections to the resolution were noted: lasi paragraph, �irst page �develop" s�oufd read developmen� and #he Plar�ning Case numbe� should be added to the tifle. s �y�s o ��ys Communi�y Deveiopmenf Director Sh�lddn reviewed ih� reques� fr�rr� �iah( �onsfruction �* _ �_.. . * •�� *_�_ �. � -i� � . - . --._ . . - --. - :� , ; i;: �our�ds 1/i�v� Plan�ing Camrnissio� Sep#ember 1�, 1996 - Spe�ia! Me�ting Pag� 3 Co., �� b�h�lf �f th� New �Aposiolsc Ch�rch, f�r � conditic�r�ai use permit and developmen� review for #he dev�iopmer�t of ��hurch f�cility on property io�ated at 3025 Coun�y Road H. She no�ed tha4 �his i#em has been before the Planning Commission a# severa! previous meetings. She �on#inc�ed by saying fihat fihe origin�f appiication included � requ�si for a front ��tback variance, and a� no4ed irr the report io the Planning Corr�missaon, th� request for a vari�r�ce has been rr�ithdr.awn artd the preser�4 plan bef�re th�m d�es r�ot require a variance bec�u�e ihe appfic�ni has r�quest�d that F'leasanfi View Drive be desig�aied as the �ron� of the lot �� opposed ta �ouniy �oad H. She pointed ��t �haf t�e Zoning C�de s�ates t�ai the shorte�t dim�r�sion of a corner Io� sho�aid be used a� th� fron# un�ess #hey ar� �ven dimensi�ns on both road�. If 4his is the case, the appli�ani c�uld designate wrhich o�e �rvould be used as 4�e fronto Since this praperty wili be developed frorn scratch, the Pleasant View Drive fro�#age would �e th� �ront�ge that qualifies aGCOrdir�g tv the Z�ning C�de. �/ith thai in mind, Stah! Construction i� proposing the building 35' from Pleas�nt View Drive which is the requirement and 3�' fr�m County Road H which is the requirement for a side lot line on � corner. Dir�ctor Sheldon noied thai residenfis in fihe area were notiFed of a public hearing for the vari�nce because #he Ci#y did not have the new plar� prior fa ihe nvt�ce being sent out. The oiher ivvo par#s of ihe appiicatior� hav� f� do wiih the canditional use permi# and th� development review, and at tt�i� time, Ms. Sheld�n we�# c�ver � di�gram of the lot and proposed �irttc�ure to explain ch�nges in the request t�at h�ve occurred �in�e the iasi meetir�g. She �iso rr�entioned th�t fhe City rec�ived � letter fror� fhe Fire L�ep�rtmeni q�estiar�ing whe#h�r or not fhere vv�� e��gh m�r��uv�eing room for fr� tr�c�s in t�e �evviy of S�ah! �onsfr�ction, or� behalf of ih� fVew Apostalic CY�ur�h, for #he Construciion of a cnurch at 3025 Cou�tfy Road H, Planning Case No. 452-96 , � �; - ' _ �. � a : .- - � designed p�r�ing lot, and two ietters were rece�ved frc�m th� applicanf o� the �eating cap�city confirmir�g t�rat they are requesiing � 15 seats in the building. �he also noted thai �he City ha� received a number of phone calls frorr� residenfs in the neighborhood (�he has received three, the Cler�-Administra#or has �is� r��eived �t I�ast fwo, ar�d sor�e of the • Council members have al�o r�ceived phor�e calls) in opposifior� of this request. {It was mentioned at this iim� #ha# � sign up sheef was being circulafed a�d ar�y perso�� in attendance were asked to sign in). Director Sheidorr proce�ded to explain th� c�anges in the new plan, in�fuding �he parking p[an in det�il.- She menfie�r�ed that just this evening she received word �rom IUIr. �ill Diem of Stah! Construction tha� a modifi�ation in the parking design will be presenfed which mvves the driveway over 4o allow for th� m�neuvering of emergency vehicles. Ms_ Sh�ldon expl�ined that in th� report she had gone step by step thraugh the criteria and fe!# that th�re were a co�aple of area� where the criteria was not met: the characier of the developmen4 �nd wrheti��r it fits into t�e character of the �eighbor�ood, noting tha# the proposed struciure will be a st�ry and a half with th� wall heights beir�g 13-16 feet and, if adding in the roof, wiil go from 26_5 fo 29 feet in height. S�e added #hat fypi�ally � home in this neighborhood is or�e story (in the range of i 5-16 ir� height} and the foatprir�i is 2,054 square feet whici� is typicaiiy farger than the averag� home. ihe other iss�e involved the amo��f of buffering and if was noted fhat th� Code cioes not specifiically a�dress fihis issue and vuhat is �arfequate" buff�ring for this requesf, She added fhat staff has iook�d, �� a -� � �_ * ..� ,'.�T ; ,. .. --'`i, l , :; � "�� - . � �� r #� .��, _ �,_ • �- - � -• = •� `. '••, . ^ �. _. -: w�y ta j�dg� the �deqc�acy of th� buffer, ai ofiher church sifies in Mounds View �nd found thafi the raarr�wesi buffer is �4° and the typic�l buifer is around 29' io 30'. This parti�l�r appli�tion has buffers of 10', � 5' and a portio� in �he cee�fer at 24' and s�e further expdained that ��e mos� critica! are�s ta the adjacent property owners are t�e narrowest, a�d this site vvo�ld have the rtarr�vvest buffers in #he community for a ct�urch. It i� also on th� smallest sit� at'/ a�re. Th� n�xt sm�llest site far � churci� is 1-'/ �cres. Staff`s view is th�� the crit�ria rela#ed to buffering �nei c�rr�patibility v�ith �P�e surrounding residerttial neighbvrhoc�d �r�nof be met. Ai ihi� fiim� Director Sheldor� explained the pr�posed resoEution� regardi�g fi�is reqcaest. Resolution No, 475-96 is for deni�i of the condiiional �se permii. f�s. Sheldort recommended fio #he Planning Commission that some further ch�nges r�eed fo be mad� in the re�oluiion from the one in the pa�lce�. 5he provided YI�e Plartning Commission wiih a har�dout showing these changes. According to the information received a# 4:00 p.rn. fror� the �ire Department, there v�as no# enough maneuvering roor� on �he sit� for emerger�cy vehicles so �his infiorma�ion was added to the findings in the resolufiion for approval {480-96). The changes ir�cluded: 1) dropping any reference to the �ite Departmer�t's opir�ion because pui�ing in a statem�nt �ha# th�y opposed the pian, in a resoiution for approval, wra�ld be in appropriafe, 2} c�rr��ting th� buiiding square �votage, 3} addi�g a ref�rence to ihe other drawings submitfied by the applican4, and 4} addir�g � sign at ti�e Piea��ni View Dri�✓� drivevvay wh�ic�t wouild say "exit ��ly'" beca�,se this drivevvay is so ��rrow, ►'• a: � ' • ";� r � ^ �'. �� ..;R ••. �.it °� ! '. �: ^ ' � :i " " ^ " � . .. �. � _ : r • •' � � _ � ', � � �. _ _ �l-�♦ R:'. �-�, ,.-.. ;..i .. .-! �'^ . -�:._:. � - � " � _. • + � f ^ � �:! '� � • f ' • • � „ .-- ' � `: } ! .. _�f •, � . •- � _ • .' _ ..if,-• . , � • . s- ,• _ � � a _i• , s a - �,' r _ • � _ • .. • r • - . _ • • • , � � �_ r �� - �-� • �s� � - � _ ;, s � rs _ : ._ •'�� _ :. . ! � !; . �� '`� � �; ,'. : .��: . • y � � "' f . .. ^ , � .... ., >. ! (Carrrmissrea»er Ober� arrived af 7:44 p.rrr.) Ct�air Pe�erson expiained ti�at it was � public hearing and that they �rvuld be openi�g the mee#ing up for questions and comments from fihe residents ancf assured �hose persons who have afready atiencied the meetings and have made comments that the Commission would definitely take those comments into consideration. He requested, in the inter°est of saving time, tha# commenis or r�marks not be repeated. ff th�re were new r�mar#cs or ifi anyone new was presan#, ihey would v�+elcome any comments they �ad. Mr. �iil Diem of Stah! Construction addr�ssed the Pi�nning Commission. (Donald bCratt, Evangelist for the fViinne�ota �rea New A�postlic Church, and Pam Kratt were �iso preseni. ) IVtr. Diem indicated #hat he has been in contact wiil� the Fire iVlarshail regarding th� issue of the er�trance. Mr. Diern, �t this �ime, �oent vver �h� provisions of fhe �iaor plan which he r�ceived in his office at 3:00 fihat afternoon. F1e address�d th� number af pews and how muc� space wo�ld be n�eded �p fror�f in �he case af � fur�eral. He ir►di�teei fhat finai plan� would be prepared for the �ity Cour�cil. After revi�v�ing the plar�s wi�h �h� Fir� PVlarshall, �h� applicant ;;, ; i�iou�d� Viern� Pl�r�ni�g �omr�issio� Sp�Cla! Mee$ing -�,- �.,.- .°; ..� �_.- _ is propo�i�g ta sh�ifi ihe en#ran�e c�rt Counfy Road Fi � 5 feef to 4he �esi to all�w beiter emr�rge�cy v�hicle a ss �vhich he i�di�ted w✓ould be acceptable by #he �ire Marshail. He indicated thaf the land�cape pian has been revised and that there are some cornnnenis in the r�sodution for approval thaf addres� the issu�s r�garding type of pi�nting�. Mr. Dier�f explained tha4 thi� proposal is 42.� percent green spa� v��ich i� docum�nted thr��gh his engir�eering firnn and that if you add °en #h� green space aii #he w4�y to ihe c�arb area, to fhe souti� and to �he v�res#, the green �pace vvould increase to 52.1 p�r�er�t, and added that the area of the builci►ng is nirte perc�r�t. He c�r�tinu�d by comparing ih� churche� i� the community, no�ing that the C�dss of �lory is o� a lo� vvith 6�,737 square feet �nd fhat the ; building is a mulfi-use buiid�ng wiih acfivities -�- other than church servi�es going on a� the same time. He added that fihe buildin� is 8,000 square feei which is four time� larger than the proposed facilify and o�upies � 1 perc�nt of the site. The lot is �nly 3.2 tinnes larger and has 50 parkir�g stalls wshich bare(y meets ihe requirements. He coniinued by adding that Church 4Jpon the Rock has a building square footage of 10,400 with toial usable square footage of 22,546 square fe@t. He added that the buiidir�g is � tirrtes iarger fihan the one they are presenting and occupi�s 14 percent of the prop�rt� and that the lof is only 3.4 tim�s larger and has 41 parking stails based ora their seafii�g capacifiy. He added tha� b�sed ort i�� seating �ap�city that wa� given to him by th�e mini�fer, the c�urch is s�ort �r�e-third of their parking. �le also informed the Commis�don that F�e vv�s in co�fiact w'rth Mr. Keni �mifh and Ms. 5ue �ark�✓ell of R�msey Co�nty t� �ddress the issue af property va[u�. They researc,,�ed as ' �ar back as th�y couid a�d fo��d r�o requesi �r �# � �. : � � �, . �� ^ �' ,. � ..a.. � Rr.* �..�': � •,...:.'� � ._.. i� ..: '" .�'� , �.- • ♦� :� 1*�.:.. .,,.�.y. ♦ ��- -: _� - ,; -_• s : ` x: � _ �:� , � �f ►.i�. -i Commissioner Brooks asked Mr. �iem if they had ioo�ed at other properties. �Ar. Dier� replied fih�t they had I�oked ex4ensiveiy at oth�r proper�i�s ti�at w�e� avaiiab[� or vac�nt, either they were not for s�l� o�° they req�ired ex#er�sive soi! correcfiions. Stev� Bc�rden, 3009 County Road Fi, asked if fhere woufd be a cement w�I! on 4he east side of the 10 fovt �ufFer zo��. Mr. �i�m expiained that no, 4here would nafi b� a�ement �rail and ihat it would be strictly I�ndscaping. Rocl�elle Mo�n, 692J Pleasanf \liew Drive, indic�ted that she wsas still a(iitle cor�fused vvith the p�rking, the pews and htow they come up with the par#cing requirement. Sh� vvas aiso cancerned about handi�apped persons attending the servi�es who placed iheir wheel chairs behind the pews and they should be counted to ensure adeqcaate parki�g far �he �hurch ar�d feit that most people in whee� chairs da drive. Mr. f�i�m repiied that ihere is �he meiro mobilify servi�e avaiiabie Y�tat drops fhe people off at the church and pick� them up. Direcior Sheldon indicated the if i# is the Pfanning Cammission's feeiing that more parking spaces are needed, ihey shou#d �stimate the number of pi�r.es that the area behir�d �the pewrs represents and devise parking at f��ar to one. She also expressed, �hat in �er �xperience, she didn't #hink #ha� th� �ntire are� behind fhe pews weouid be used for a solid row of whee! chairs. She suggest�d per#�aps one �dditionaf space be �ssigr��d i� th�t aisie are�. Mr. Di�m sia�ed �hat ihe r�eed for parking for the handicapped individ��ls i� adeires��d by ti�e handicapped si�lls in th� p�rking lof. ` :1 i;i I!i i _: _1 3 �. ! � i, ��: ''" �� .: � ! ..,. R' i -'� - � �..... „ i . �.�+ i' � _ � . *�� :� � - � - *^�; ! ��, ' � . . ,... . . .. V . _ <., ., :. . � . _ ,- � , * ,. ` -� ' -. . " � :.. .� • 1� � �+ t � " .. , �. .. .:., • - � = ' ^� ♦ �� - �� _�.^� �1 ��.�..'� i. :.._�y ^`.: ,.: ...._ . .�. # ��. .�" � �•,.. �R - �- • • • � � y _, „ � . ! • ' •' �' °� _ • ' � ^ * • , - � • " • * "```.� � � A- �� .'�.i -_ ^a� - � ♦ � � { � *.' • r - � -.: � •-..r . �:. .. �*� .. -. � � .� "�`. , }... , . �;..�. � . � � a . ! � ^ i • � ... � ,�� .�, �- M •� � -,i � R" �I��i: �'" ::�. .�., .: : r' � / .. . < •� �. � � , _. � . . � .. _ .. ... ... ^ ., ,... ,� �. . � � - � .. ... � - i � - �. - a ° ■ ^ - � :�- � „.�. ��'- � .� � ...� } � �; 3 _ - '�. R � � !� �"�i--� •.� ' ':� '.� ' ," ° • � � 1/ictoria Oiis-Dretsch, 6928 Ple�sant Vievv Drive, indie.�ted that she was not able to atte�d any of the other meetings but did wa�t to expres� her concerns aboui acc.�mr�odating for f�ture growth. Nlr. Diem briefly explained the church's sifuatior� on growth and indicaied that #1�is issue was �ddressed at a previou� meeting. Doris Friedland, 2925 Gounty �o�d H, �+anted to know how many f�milies were part of the �!°turch's exis#ing congr�gation. Nir. Diem indicated ihai he did no# hav� the list with him bufi he believ�d ihe �umber �f families to be around 24 and indicated that the average siz� f�miiy i� arou�d fo�r persons. Ms. Sheldo� expiain�d that the r�tio for parking i� li�ked fi� seating r,apacity ar�d fhat i4 is fig�ared fv►�o different ways: if yo� hav� fixed s�ating (#hea#er iyp� s�at�) th�re is one f�r every four se�� nd if yo�a have benci��styi� pews you � . �.:'. � . � �' °� � „*° R� � �4� I'! �* _ . , t�ke th� lengih of tf�e pe�o �nd divide it by 2� inch�s to g�# a��at and iher� take ihafi r►umber and divide it b� taur. Dir�ctor �heldon express�d thai th� �ray th� Cod� is wri�ien, #he plar� has enr�ugh parking. Commissioner Sievenson inq��red as to the maximum height of th� s�eepie. Mr�. �iem repEied thai the s4e�pl� ��ight varies with the size of the �uiEding. (l�s. Sheldon measured the plar�s �and ir�dicafed ihe s#eepie io be 41.5 fee4 above fihe grade. Commissioner Miii�r �sked if i� w�re a request for a singie farr�ily home wevuld there be restrictions on how large �hey could build th� house? Director° Sheldr�n ir�dicated that the Zoning Code does no4 h�ve � coverage fimit, bui v�re do have sefback r�quir�m@r�ts. Commi�sion Miiler indicated that it could be coneeiv�ble f�a� a home co�ald b� quife a bii iarger than the church proposal. �/like Egger, 6952 Pleasani Vier� Driv�, had concerns on what the property is zoned and iQ was explained fihaf ii is zoned r�sidentiai and fihat the R--1 district allows church�s wiih approva) of a condi#ional use permi#. H� also expressed concerns writh tra�c. Bill Nielfon, 6953 Pleasant 1/ier� Drive, inquired abe�ut the fre departmen# issue, and had concerns wiih ihe driveway width a�d the parking lofi. Director Sheldon bri�fly weni over the parking pian and how it reiates to emerg�ncy v�hicle acce�s. � . .. ,. .,-. � `. -: � - � - -. -. - ..� .. .:- - f F�� '• �� s � � �� i *' i�- .. �� s � �' � � . � ! �� ! ' 1 � � � ,r �`i �� fli !� ^ �i" � • ^ .�� _ _ _ �. `: >;i ,' , ' _': t � �! _ #. ` � : t � ... . A � � � !� ' . � � ^ �. - � �. _ . >. �i �-. ��*' f', �,Il�!' ` ♦ ^ 'i � r ' If "� � .� �� !� i'�� ' �_, !_ �: '. � IM, . � � �. a � . i' - !: ! � - ^ ! - � � � •' • • s - • ' s 4 � -' f' ' •� • � t.� y� .�.. .. _ . . ;. � �R •R! • __ � a��-�:_'• - _• �' a -� Jun� Eikvar, 6��6 F'le�sar�t i/i�w D�ive, expres�ed hrer concern about on-sfir�et parking and speciai eve�ts stach as weddings and funerals �hat wiEl be h�id a� the church and wa� also cancerned �bout the blind int�r�ectior� comi�g out of Pleasant Vievv Drive south- bound, looking at Couniy Road H. She �ras aiso concerned abouf ihe enfor�ement of fre codes and the is�ue of snc�w piov�ing. Cornmi�sioner �rasaemle inq�ired ihat in ligh# of 4he ch�nges, is it Staff `s position �o still re�ommend denial, and Direcfor Sheldon indicafed, yes. Dan GrifFer�, 2965 County Road i�, who lives direcfi(y across from th� propos�d enirance of the parking lot asked if the plan was to cui dovvn �[! o� th� exisiing ire�� to cre�te #he p�rking lot. Direcfior Sheldon reviewed the I�nd�caping pl�n and indic�t�d that 6 of the 12 trees proposed to be cfeared are 20°' oa� trees. � - - . . , . . - .: _ ,, • : . • .- °. •� _.. • _ . �. .__ ',.�.. • - . R •.•, ,; _. _ K .� f^� - �- �� • �i - a .� � ` : : • `i � � � �/: : - � � .�• � :"�! .! - � •' i4 ! �• _• ' � �' •- �; - � • � � - * � .. � � �.::' r, • ^ - , -^ _ ' � •, �' � � �. � -. - -� . -.: � . . . . ._. � , . • -� �. �� . * ..�. :��_ '..� � � �.. .� �. , , ,. _ ,, � > ��.:�. � y. - •-� 1 � .. •�� •i.• .•• 'i - ��^ • •i�� ^•� �: � r...� • . � • •:�}� . .;` ....... �....., ' � � � �. # - : � �': a ' ' � �- �!• ... ��: � i�l�--��• . .-.. . �� ,-. . .._ ' • � - ,� ." + .R � Lynr� 1�lidseth, 3001 C�unty Road H, wanted tea know if the Planning �omrriission recammends denial and it goes ta �ity Council, w8�at v�+ill they do wifh the information? �hair Peterson r�pfied by saying thai one of the Planning Commission's main jobs is �o make sure tY�ai all issues are explored, Direcior Sheldon also replied by sayir�g that ihe City Gouncil receives a staff repor� along with the Pianning Commission's recommendaiion and a public i�earing vvill be heEd by fh� City Councii and they will then t�take their decision. Commission �rasaemfe �xplained thafi this decision has noihing to do with the church, it� membership or �is feelings toward ihe c,�urch. He was recomrrier�di�g denial because of lot size and the fact #hat the he believes it io be an overdevelopment of the lot #hafi is d�signat�d R-1, fow densify use and he concurs vvith Staff s recomrnendation tha� ih� height and size ofi ihe buiidir�g do not f# #�e surrounding area. He also expr�ssed ihat he shares �he concern� with the sur-rounding property owners regarding th� parking lot and its effeci on property vai��s, b�t stat�d thaf h� undersiands property values ter�d nat to decrease wher� �here is a church buiit ir� a neighborhood. Ne stated that the parking lot adds �n ex�raordinary circumstance, and that if this w�re a one �cre lot and th�r� w�re more buffer, he would have �o problem wi�h the request. ) - - _: >; . • ' � . .- • � � R �� _ � ,,� ._•,, � � ,_ .,. � �. � � � � M, .: � .. ... :R� . " � ,'.; �, _ ,.., ) ,.. R � ! �_:�^ . Comrr�issioner tVliller s#ated �ha� sh� would have to go �against Yhis d�r�iai becaus� some o# the items ar� fairly subjeciive anct she questioned what is adequafe �nd add�d thaf w�hat is adequ��e far one p�rson may �ot b� adequate for �noth�r. She beli�ves thai this i� a situatior� �nrhere pe�ple like t�ing� the way threy are and don't v✓f�at �� ange, b�tt �he fee[s if a prope�ty b�i�ngs #o �omEOn� they shauld hav� 4he opporiur�i�yy to �se tha� property. She believ�s th�t the applir.�nt has gvne thraugh the criieria and th�y h�v� r�ne4 the parkir�g requirem�nts and added rncare buff�ring �han th� Code r�guires. Comrnis�ior�er Johnsion staied he bef�eves thai ifi is too ir�#e�se ofi a use for the iot and vvouid have no pr�blem vvith a smaller ehurch. Comrmissioner Obert di�agreed wiih the deniai on the basis that the applicant has done everythir�g thafi the Cifiy �as asked of them and beiieves that �hey have a�t�ally become more acccammodating. He felt there has been some preceden# �Iready sei in Mounds !liew as far as the prop�riy af vther churehes. Fie beli��es something else ca� be done y�t to modi�je the buffering issue and suggested thai more research be do�e. # _ . * �.. _ ". ! •�^ : ' �' .. �^�� -: � • • . . ! ! !; i1 ': ♦ � � �. � , � *._ y �� . � ,. _ • � - . - �� ,. r. - � .�. � . -� � � � � �" �. • ,� � � -. . .. � � � �=� � - •. � • ��. � ■ ' � .. � .. � ... . � � � , � �.� � ^, � � �� ., i ' � :!. .. �±-.. !'� t�:� �« .... f: :.._ _. , r, . ... � � � - _ - � � � . . � � '�- � ` - i � �� . a. � ... .. �-: .'. .�. •".. �- .,_._ _�` ., � � � •�� •1+ r � �. ,..._ ..; -..^ ,.:� ....y . �i �. �. ,: � . ..... ..- � :.. � .^�.. , �. • . . • ' • _. � � * . �.�. �. -.. � . �. .. - :. �, �. .'�.� � �� - �� ^ �;- • � ^ '^ +' ' - ♦r:� � � a •. � - �.�� _... .. ,,. . -... ,. ...a_.. ,� � ��.' �:��..� � ,.. �. ` � ,r.�. �.. . • � ` �" }:. _ � � _ � . .i �; _ ! � ��` y � 1 �' - � •' �• t�• 4 ay2s 3 itayes il�otion/Second: �rasaemlel�rook� to adopt Resolufion No. 476�96 recomrnendirtg d�nia[ of iE�e de�elopment reviev,r r�q�aes# �or ihe Ne� Apa�tolic Church a� 30�5 County Ro�d N. Commissioner Br�s��mie indic,�f�d ihat basicaiiy you cannoi approve �h� developme�� review if you do r�ot approve fhe conditiorr�l use permifi. Commissioner Br�saemle amended #he mofiion to include the it�ms from the Staff handout. The amer�dments were approved by the seconder. 4 ayes 3 nays Community Deveiopment �irector Sheldon informed the Commission and citizens thai they wiii be asfcing ihe Council io set tite hearing for �his ca�e at t�eir ne� meetir�g fln September 23rd. She infc�rmed the residents that those who received a previous �otice reg�rding this case �ouid receive a noiic� regarding the City Coun�il public hearing and i�di�at�d tha# it is sent io prope�fy owners withirt 350 feet of the subject properiy. � . -. Motion Carried ;i ...�! ��. . �..,,. � y_..., , '�..��.,...... �,..��. � � ! x� *� � r.�� . ' .. - � �,.. 1 ;_.i _ � . — �-'�"' � * . . .. �� ' � � �,, .:! • .� � ��- �" .; * �� # . �� _ � _+' �' ! * — � e ' - •s ��+�" ��_ ��., i . �,. :; :'•, 1 � N � � \ . . /`� . . . . . .... . .... . . . . .. _... . _ . I __. . .. _ .._..... ._. ._. ._._-_ ._ .._..__. . . __ . .. � / . _..._ _ � . /! r . '� __ . - ..... _..._.. '�-�-._� . . . _. _..._. _, . . . . ` . .._ _ .. " _' . -_. _ __ �.e'��eJ � _ . .- ___ _ 1�� cc� - --- 7� _.-_lQa_7 7 __ .. �� _ --- � _. 19�q �/��u�, _------%-��_7� . __ -- -- �-�� _ _ � D `� � ��- � -_ ----- ---- _ � �� / 3 _ � ----- �� .� v.t ,��a�� pleas�,��;��__��_ i�d � q6�6, _. e s � vo (p _ !',.,�LeG�ov-�t/i P.cc) . � , � ��% - �f � � �o . � �.5't�'�_� ._ �as�� ---- --�_`-! � --�gsD,sa�-� 1��.. __ � ,. _ _ _ -- --- ----`t 4��_-�_"a-� � _ _ _ _ ��_,�c��°.�'--- _ �'`��a_ �,��% � � ___. ��6_-�5�� {au,� �.�� -� o�a �, g �� s - �� _ ___ _ _ _ --- _ _ ---- - - - _ . � _ -- - - - -- ----- - - __ _ . . ; r - � _ ___ _ - --- �� i� � � ._ _ -- ___ ---- __ ��-- ��.� ---- 1- . _ �ay.��.��-d_�� __ _3�Y�_�� l_-�--_ __. 7�a-�� '� - - ----- -_ _ _. _..___ . i i �, �d.A1 C'Dnl4'�l�GfP i�,U �nfc�_ . �7 qvJ .q/ ,/ �( //��r �} / _... �C. __ __ 1� r r �Cl��D (. �'I �° /��(%i/`� i�%OR�/� 6 (/V �' !/�! i��" �5� �e70P-� �,�'-�,Jq� _ _.— %.��J / 7 ��._.., .._--____. - - _. __ . .._ __ _ _ . _._ . _ _- - _ -� ,��- � �'7v -�--� _ �"� °��% --- /� , � _ � �s� ��U� _ �� --�o�� __ _ .:: � _ - �� !�� v ��G� _ � q ----- ��53 ��s��' �. �-19�.- - �° � ��8 .�i/�,��,�� - 1 _ __ � S � - � 7 �� s ��__ � _ �� U,��v � �.�=� c.�-��f� y � � a _ . _ �r �' �' _ I�o�.,r,--, -K� c�,-'� 1 �{-�'� �I ��"�` �r� tS� �--� d� �g"o -c� �i � r , � �ozc� l� r4'�'� l�" � 5'�7 %�/� �¢�.-� ,x/E >-r�, d/� �� o�r� , � 6 C� i'� 2 � � c�, � �-=' `� a a � �.,o c�s �. ,�: -� v � F �,u �J r _ �M. V _ � � C� � �- �� r t � �� e � ��,( ��-�S�` % � ��v .�� . � � 7 �� -�7�1 `��' �.�.ea , . z-v� � 1 dse � 3�a � C��,�,� �l �}-- � ��,"��` 7 ��" � ��, � � �� . . W+ i� � . � i �� < :., - .l i -, � ��. °�� . _ ► __ _ �=� _. 111 , �_, , _ � � . ,, . �. �. �' , �� / ' - ii . .� ', '� � f�� MOUN�S 'VIEW PLANNING COMNIIS�ION OCTOBER 2, 199b 7;Od P.M. 1, Call to Order 2. RoII Call 3. 4. � 7 REGLTLAR I�EETING AGENDA Review and Approval of Minutes: September 18, 1996 (Enclosed) Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda CITIZENS: BEFORE SPEAKING, PLEASE COME TO THE PODIUM, AND GTVE YOUR FULL NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE MINUTES Planning Case No. 457-96 � �; 8480 Pleasant View Drive ''' ` ` Ronald L: Gardner � NOTICE DONE Request for a variance to allow an encroachment to within 10 feet of the rear property Y�� vhen a 30 foot rear seiback is required, to replace a deck with a three-season porch. StaffRecommendation: Approve Plaiuiing CaseNo, 458-9G 7090 Knollwood Drive Vic & Son Canstruction NOTICE DONE Request for a variance to allow a hoase addition within six feet of an e�sting garage. StaffRecommendation: Approve with contingencies Planning Case No. 459-96 f NQTICE DONE 775 � Spring Lake Road ; ` ;. : s � ;; � .; John R Manning r.,;.,f ; I; -;,;, c' �- Request for a variance to aiiow construction of a concrete driveway at one faot frorn the sid� properiy line where �ive feet is required. StaffRecommerrdation: Deny Plann�ig Case No. SP-008-96 e Revision of parlcing lot setbacks between resider�tial a�d churches and commerciat uses a Revision is minimum lot size for churches and commerciai uses in residential zone districts where such uses are aIIowed by conditianal use permit StaffRecommendation: Approve ��*��*�� Ai'1'I,ICANTT�: YOUR ATTENDANCE AT THIS MEETING I5 REQUESTED. PLEASE NOTIFY CITY HALL AT 784-305� IF YOU ARE UNA�3LE TO ATTEND. THANK YOU - �*��*��*��*��*�� Agenda Continued Plannuig Commission Agenda October 2, 199b Page 2 12. S taff Re;aor� I3. Chairperson and Planning Commissioners Reports 14. Adjoununent '� `, .: :� � - : �1��f �� :.,� �. � _ � .- ��- �� _, �� =��s �� .� � �� . �_ _ � -. - . _ : .,, � r, - �,: � � _ �� ...� � ,__ r _, * � - ` � +4 � �, -• :_ • �- � �' - . � :, � . •� ^ �- : *+, NiEfViBERS PR�S�NT: Commissioner� Johrrsi��, Miller, �ro�ks, St�v�nson, �rasaemie and Chair (��terson. (Cornmi��ioner Obert arrived i�te.) � ,3� . � R - - .. - , � � � t .+� � . z . � #. ' � - - ,_ . Community Dev�lopment Director S�eldon reviewed the reqtaest from the tl�ounds �ievv Economic Developmenfi Authnrity for a reduction in the required width for � comer lot. She explainecf thaf ihe required width is 100 feet and the request is for t�e lot �o be 80 feet �or the property at 8265 Spring Lake Road. �he continued by staiir�g ihat the applicant has appiied to fhe Pfanning Commissio� by lefiter outlining their reasons they fe�! ther� is a h�rdship i� this case and she presented the summarized informatio� to th� Planning Commi�sion in a repor#. She expiained thaf the most sigrtific.ar�fi item� from the variance criferia have fo do vvith fif�e Eoi being plaited in 193°� at its currenfi width and added t��t ther� is no additio�al unpfatted or vaca�t land �n that block if�a� could be purch�s�d to add to this lot it� wid�r� it i�ire�tor Sh�lcion noted there is sufficier�t land �ithin fhe l04 to �r�ai� a � • •-1 r � 3. Consideration o� Resoiuiion tVo.477-96 Regarding Variance Request by Mounds �Oiew Economic t7evelopmeni Aiatharity, 8265 Spring Lake ��ad, Plar�ning C�s� No. 455-96 _ ; � . .► � � ;: W �:. � nilounds iliew Plan�ing Commission Spe�ial Meeting y�._ �� ,,* + ..:. - buifd�bie area for � si�gie f�rnily f�arne, a�d if the variar�c� is not granted this lot would be held vacant b�cau�e ihey would b� ur�able to ge# a buildir�g permii. Sh� concic�ded by recomm�ndir�g that the requesi be approved based on the �act ih�t it is noi actions en fihe part of th� applic�nt ihaf has ca�sed the probl�m and u�less the variance is grar�ted #hey wi{I noi be able to use th� (at for its fypicai purp�se in �n �-1 disfiricfi and fha4 they ea�gh� to be able to build a single fami[y home on their property. Director ��eidon nated th�t a �esolution had be�r� prepared approving this variance reqta�si �nd ir�ciicated thai Jer�r�ifer �ergm�n, representing the Mound� Vi�vv Economic Dev�iopmenf ,4uthoriiy, was pres�nf. I� wa� noted by Dir�ctor Sheldan th�t ih� purpose of fhis req�ae�t is to demoiish the existing house and cor��truc# a new ene as p�rt of th� City's Nousing Repiacement Program and to markefi ihe lo#. Chair Pefierson stated that this item was discussed a# fheir previous agenda meeting. %/lotion/�econd: Stever�son/Brasaemle to �dopt Resal�stion No. 477-9fi approving a loi weidfih variance request by ihe Nlounds View �conomic Developmen# Authority for �265 Spring Lake Road, P(anning Cas� No. 455-96. Corrections to the res�lution were not�d: last paragr�pt�, first page "devele�p" should read develo�menf �r�d the Pfanning Case numb�P shouid be added io the Qitle. 6 ayes 0 nays U:• *� - -�;� Carnmuniiy �evelopmenf �irector Sheldon 4. Pub[ic Hearing reviewed t�e r�que�� from St�hi Con�tructio� Regardir�g the R�q��st � � � !' + ��"s N1�ur�ds View Plan��r�g Carr�mi�sior� Special Mee4ing „�._ ��; ; �*� •,,,, Co., on b�half of th� �ew,Apo��olic �hurch, for a�onditior�ai use permit and de�a�iopm�nt review for the developmen# of � ch�arch facility on properfiy focated af 3025 Counfy �oad H. She noied 4hai this ifiem I�as be�n before fihe Planning Commi�sion a� severai pr�vious meefings. She contir�u�d by sayir�g that fihe origir��! �ppiir�tior� included � r�quesf for a front sefback variar�ce, ar�d �s r�oted in th� repo�i #o the Planning Commi�sion, the request for a varianc� has been wiihdravvn and the pr�sent plan before thern does r�of req�ire a varianc� bee,�use ihe �ppiic�nt ha� r�quested fhai Pleasant i4iew �riv� b� desigr��te� as the front of fhe loi as opposed io Couniy �oad h1. She poi�ted oui that the Zcar�ing Code staf�� that t9�� shortes# dimertsion �f a corr�er io� should be tased a�s the front uniess they ar� ev�n dim�nsiorts nn both road�. if fhis is the �se, fhe appi�cant coufd designafe v�hich o�te wouid be used �s the front. Since this property will b� developed from scraich, fhe Pleasant Vi�w Driv� froniage vuould be #he frantage 41�at � qualifes ac�ording �o the Zoning �od�. VVith that in mind, Stahl Cor�strucfiion is propasir�g the bc�iiding 35' from Pleasant View Drive which is the requiremenf and 30' from Couniy Road H which is the r�quir�ment for a side lot line nn a corr�er. Director Shefdon nofed tF�a# residents in the a�ea vvere notified of a pubiic hearing for 4he variance because the City did not have ihe new pfan prior fio fh� r�otice being �ent out. The other two parts of the applicatior� have to do with fhe cc�ndiiiona! use permit and the development revie�r, and at this time, i�Rs. Sheldon went over a diagram of the fot and proposed strucfure to expiai� char�ges in th� request #hai have oc�urred sirt�e 4h� last meeting. SY�e al�o mentior�ed that the Ci�y r�ceiv�d a l�t�er fror� the Fire �epartment questior�ing vvi��fher or r�oi tt�ere w�s �ncaugh rr�ane�avering room far fire irucks in the newly o� Stah[ Cor��tructior�, or� behalf of ihe New Apostolic Church; for the Construc�ior� of � church ai 3025 Co�tnty Road H, Plannirtg Cas@ t�o. 4�2--96 4 � ;i� � - � � ^�'� � � � � T . r r: _ � � � �- r designed parking Io4, and two letiers were received f�om the �pplicant an the seating capacity con�rming thafi fhey are reque�tir�g 115 seats in the building. St�� aiso noted that the City ha� received � number of phor�e caEls from residents in ihe neighbarhood {she has received ihree, ihe Clerk-Administrafior has also received a� leas� fwo, and some af ihe Council merr�bers have a[so r�ceived phc�ne �ails) in opposition of thi� requesfi. (It was menfioned �t this time that a sigr� up si�eet was being circulated artc� any persons i� a#tendance were asked to sign in}. Direcfor Sheldan proceeded io �xplain �he changes in t}�� n�w plan, incl�ding the parking plan in de�aii. She menfi�r�ed ih�t just this evening she received word fr�m Mr. �ill fJierr� of StaF�i Constr�action fhat a mcadific�tion in the parking design will be presented which moves the driveway over to a[Iow for the maneuvering of emergency vehicles. i�s. Sheldon explained that in the repari she �rad gone step by sfep i�rough fhe crit�ria �nd felt that ther� were � couple af areas wher� the criteria was not mei; the character of the developmer�t and whether it fit� info the character of the neighborhood, noting that the proposed struciure wil! be a siory and a half with the wail heights being 9 3-16 feet and, if adding in the roof, will go from 26.5 to 29 feet in height. She added that iypicalEy a home in this neighbarhood is or�e story (ir� the rang� of 15-�6 in height) and the footprini is 2,a54 square feet whiLl� is typic�lly f�rger than fihe av�rag� hom�. The ot�er issue i�volved fhe amaunt of buffering ar�d ii �,ras noted tha� the �ode does not �pe�ifically addres� this i�su� �r�d what is �adeq�ate° b�ffering fo�° 4�i� r�quesi. She added ihat sfaff has looked, �� a -�'- •. � ..! � �- :. � � � � .� - �;; � - Mn�ar�ds �/iew F'lartning C�mmission Sep�ember � 8, i 996 � Speciai Nleetir�g P�ge 5 ,;' ,. �,: w�y to judge ihe adequacy o� if�e buffer, at ofher church sifes in Niourids View and found that the n�rrovvest buffer is 14' and the typieal buffer is around 29' to 30'. ihi� parti�uiar application has bufFers of 1 Q', 15' and a portion in the center af 24' and she further exp�ained that �he most critic�l areas to the adjacent property owr�ers �re the r��rr�west, ar�d this site would have �he narrowest buffers in tF�e c�mmu�ity f�r a ch�r�h. li is �Isa on th� sma�lesY sife a#'/ acre.. The r��xf �m�tlesfi sit� f�r a churc� is 1- "/2 acres. Staff`s view is th�t fhe criteri� relafed to buffering �nd comp�tik�iliiy wei4h the surrounding r��idenfial neighborhood cann�f be mefi. A� this time �irector S�elda� explai�ed th� proposed resolufion� regarding ih�is request. F�esalution N�. 475-96 is for deni�i of the conditional use permit. Ms. Sheldon recommended ta the Planning Gommission �hat some furth�r changes need io be made in the resoEution fram the one in #he pack�t. She provided the Planning Commission with a handouf shovvir�g these chang�s. According. to #he infarmation receiv�d at 4:Q0 p.m. from the Fire Department, ther� �vas not enough maneuvering room on the �i�e for emergency vehicl�s so this informafior� w►as added to the finding� in the resoiution for appraval (480-95). The changes included: 1) dr�pping ar�y refererrce ia the Fire �epar4�neni's �pir�ion because putting in a stafiement that th�y propose .the p1an, in � resolution for �pprov�l, wouEd beLn appropriate��2) correcting the building square foatage, 3) �elding a refierence to the other drawings �ubmitted by the appiicanf, and �) addir�g a sign at the Pleasar�t Vievv Drive driv�way whi�h wauiid sa� "exit o�ly" be�au�e ihi� drivevv�y is �o narrow. Nt�und� l�iew �lanr�ing Commission �epiember 18, 199� Speciai Meeting Page 6 F�r the dev�Iapmer�t r�view p�ck�ge, ihe fir�t resolution is recorrimending denial if the condifiionai use permit is nof issued becaus� you would not be abfe �a ge� to fhe next sfi�p of approving the desigr� layou�. �he added that the only char�ge to this resaEutinn is �o add in the drawings. The changes to the la�t resolution which wvuld recomme�td approvai of 4he development review included dropping �he s�ntence having fo d� vvit� ihe fre d�parfinenf, addir�g the dravvings, and adding an "exit only" sign. (�ommissioner Obert arrived �� 7: 4O p. m.} Chair Peterson expEain�d fha� it was a public hearing and that fhey would be opening fihe mee�ing up for quesfiions �nd commenfs fram fih� re�idents and assured those person� v�ha have alre�dy aftended the meetings and have made �omments that the Commission woufci definifiely take t�ose comments inf� ;, �, � consideration. He requested, for�tsrne s�e; that comments or remarks not be repeated. If there were new remarks or if anyan� new was preseni, they wo�sld welcome �ny camments they had. Mr. �ii! Diem of Stahl Construcfiion addressed the Planning Commission. (Donaid iCratt, -�_Evangalisf�forthe Minnesota area NewAposilic - - - _: Church, and �am {�Cratf were also present.} Mr. C?iem indicated that he has been in cantacf with the Fire �/lar�hall regarding the issue of fhe entrance. Mr. Di�m, at this tim�, went over the pr'ovisions of the floor plan which he received in his office at 3:00 ih�t afternoon. He addressed the number of pews �nd how much space �+auld be �eeded up front ir� the case of a funeral. He ir�dicated t�at final plans wo�id be prep�r�ci for the �ity CounciE. After revier�ving ii�e plans witi� the Fire Marshail, the applica�t Mounds Viewr F'l�r�nirrg Commission 5epternb�r 18, 1996 �pecial nllee�ing � Pag� 7 i� pr�posir�g to shift the �n�rance on Co��fy Road H 15 ��et io the vvest io allow better emergency vehicle access which he indi�ted �eould be accep#abie by the Fire Nlar�hail. He indicated that the [andscap� pfan has beer� revised and that 4here are s�me comments in the resolufion for approval that addres� #h� i��u�s regarding #ype of plantings. Mr. Diem expfain�d fhat this proposal i� 42.5 per�nt gree� sp�ce whic� i� documented through his engineering firm and that if yau add in th� gr�en sp�ce all the way to the c�rb �rea, to the sou#h ar�d #a the r�est, the gr�en spaee would i�crease to 52.1 percen�, and �dded that the area af the b�iiding i� nine percenf. He cor�tinued by comparing the �hur�h�� ir� the commur�ity, noting �h�i fh� Cross of Glory is ort a I�t with 68,737 squ�re fieet and ihai the `__. ' building is a mui�i-use building with activities other ihan church services going on at the same time. Me added that the b�silding is 8,000 squ�re feet v�rhich is faur tim�s farger than the propos�d faciliiy and occupies 11 percent of the �ifie. The lot is only 3.2 times I�rger and has 5Q parking stails which barely meets th� requiremenfs. He continued by adding tha# Church Upon the Rock has a buiidir�g square footage of 10,400 with tot�i usable square footage o� 22,54fi square feet. He added iha# Yhe building is 5 tim�s larger fihan the one they are presenting and occupies 14 perc�nt of the property and fihat ihe lot is only 3.4 times farger and �as �1 parking stalls based on their seating capacity. FI� added that based an ihe s�ating capa�ity fhat vva� giver� to him by the minisfier, fhe churcl� is s��rt one-ihird af �heir parking. H� also ini`ormed th� Corrtmissiort th�# P�e vvas ir� con#�ci �nrith Mr. Ker�t Smi�h �nd i�s. Sue �arkwefl of F�am�ey Cotanty t� addre�s the : issue of properfy value. ihey re��arch�d �s far bacic as they co�ald �nd found no r�quest or Mour�ds Vievv PlannES�g Comrrtission ��piemb�� 18, 1996 �pecial Meefing Page � � c�mpl�int on vaiu� reductian to property wher� praperiies ab�at ch�r�he� already built or in where ch�arches �re proposed. Commissioner Brooks asked AAr. Diem if ihey had Iooked at other pr�perties. i�r. Diem repEied that ti�ey had looked exier��ively at other properties fihaf were available or vacani, either they �ee�-e r�of for sale or they required exfiensiv� soii corrections. Steve �orden, �009 Coun�y Ro�d W, asked if tY�ere wouEd be � cemenf walE on the east side of tF�e 10 foot buffer zone. Nir. �iem expiained that no; there woulci nofi be a cement wall and ihat if wouid be strictly landscaping. Ro�hefle Moon, 6929 Pleasa�t View Drive, indicated �haf she was sfiill a(ittle cc�r�fused v►✓ith the parking, the pews and how ihey come up with the paricing requirem�ni. She was also concerned abou# handicapp�d persons aitending the services who pfaced iheir �rheel � chairs behind fihe p�ws and fihey shouid be counted to en�ure adequate parking fcar the church and �Felt that most people in wheei chairs da drive. Nlr. Diem-replied that fihere is the mefiro mobiliiy service available 4hat drops the people off at fihe church and picks them up. Director Sheldon indicated the if it i� the Pl�nning Cornmission's feeiing thafi more parking spaces are rteeded, they should estimate th� number r�f places that the area behind the p�ws represents and devise par�ing at four ia one. She also �xpressed, that in her experience, she didn't fhink that the ��tire are� '`� behind the pews would be �sed for a solid row , ;, �'�wheel chairs. She suggested perhaps one addifional space be assigned t� th�t �isi� �rea. Mr. Diem stated thai the r�e�d for parking for the har�dicapped ir�dividuals i� �ddressed by fhe �andicapped stalls ir� the parkir�g 1ot. €1 � _ � '� � =� �� . Mounds 1/ierr� Plar�nir�g Coenmission Sep�ember 1�, 1996 , , Special Meetirtg Page 9 Commissioner �rasa�mle �xpressed fhat he did not ihink that the issue is whether c�r not ther� i� har�di�pped parking stalls bec�use they ar� required, but rather th� foial number of p�rking spaces for the siie. t�ir�cior Sheidon expfained ihaf what if may come dowe� to is whefher �h� Planning Commission wants to take �he fio4al required based an s�ating ar�d keep the handic.�p sp�ces separ�te wi�en determinir�g if th� total �umb�r requir�d has been met. Ur does the Planr�ing Corrtmissi�n vvanfi to count ihe handicapped parking siafl� toward the total? Corr�missi�r�er Nliller comrnen�ed th�i � handicapped person vuho has � stic�er or tag does not r�ecessariiy mean they are in a�rh�el chair and may be sitting in the pews. Chair Pefierson noied that it has been fi�te Planning Commissi�n's practi�e to count fihe har�dicapped spaces faward the fotai required. Victoria Otis-Dretsch, 6928 Pleasant View Drive, indicated that she w�s noi able to atiend ar�y of the at�er meetings but did wan� fio express her° �oncerns abouf accnmmodatir�g for future growth. 1VIr: Diem brief[y explained the c}�urch's sifivatio� on growth and i�dic�fed th�i this issu� wras addressed at a previou� meefing. Doris �riedland, 29�5 Co�nty Road H, wanted to �now how many familie� were pat� of the church's existing congregafiion. Mr. Diem indicated that he did not have the Iist with him but he believed the number c�f �amili�s to be aro�nd 24 and indicafed tha# the average size farr�ily is �rour�d four persor�s. Nis. Si�eidon expiained thai the ra�ia for parki�g is lir�k�d to seafing cap�city and that ii is figured two differer�t ways: i� y�u have �x�d seating (theater type sea�s) th�r� is car�e for every four seais and if you have bench@siyie pews yo� � ,; -r t .<.. � R- `• �' -,, ' _, -. � . � *, +� - - �. �-• - •-' � �•* Jr f � % take the ler�gth of the pew ar�d divide if by 22 inches to get a seafi and iher� tak� that number and divide i� by four. Director Si�efdon expre�sed thai the way the Cade is written, fhe plan has enough parking. Commissioner Stevenson inquir�d as fo the maximum height of the steeple. Mr. Diem repEied that �i�e steeple height varies wriih th� size of the building. Nls. S#�eldon mea�ured th� plans and indicaied fhe steeple to be 41.5 fee# aEaove the grad�. Commissioner Mifter asked if ifi were a r�quesi far a single famiiy �orr�e would ihere be r�s�rictions c�n hovu large ihey coufd build fii�e �ous�? Director �t�eidon indicated that the Zoning Cocie does not have a�overage limit, but we dv have sefiback req�irements. Commission 1V�iller ind�cated that it could be conc�ivabfe ti�at a�tome cauld be quite a bit iarger than the c�urc�t prop�sa[. Mike Egger, fi952 Pleasant View Drive, had concerns on what the prope�fy i� zoned and i# wa� explained fhat ii is zoned residenfia! and that the R-1 district allows churches wiih approval of a conditional use permii. He also expressed concerns with traffic. Bill Nlel(on, C953 Pleasant View Driv�, inquired abeut the fre department issue, and had concerns with fihe driveway width and the parking 1ot. C�irector Sheldon briefly went over fihe parkir�g plan and how it relaies to emergency veFti�le acc�ss. Dan Moon, 6929 P leasant Vi�w Drive, expressed hi� conc�rr� �bo�at hovv close the prc�posed parking iot woufd be to his properiy and fihe effect� this �rouEd have on the vaiue �f his home. He also expres�ed tha� he believes this is � gross ov�rdevelaprneni caf th� prc�perty. M�ur�ds iliew Pfanr�ir�g Cammi�sian S�ptember 1�, 199� Special Meeting Page i � Sfeve �orden, 3009 �ocar��y Raad F�, expres�ed thafi h� would iike ti�� Planning Commissior� to go alo�g with what City Staff is r�corr�mer�din9, t�ai the buiiding is too large and too tall (th� �teeple}, tf�� parkir�g io� is too Earge fior 4hi� �alf acre bfock, and fha� the development is grossfy oversized for ti�eir neighborho�d which is green and wooded ��td he wat�ld like t� keep it that way. J�ne Eikvar, 69�� Pleasar�t Vi�w Drive, expressed her concern ab�ut on�sireef pa�king and speciaf �vents such as w�driings and fUr�erais �h�t �ifl be held �Y the cht�rch and v��s �iso concerned about the bfind inter�e�ii�n coming out of Pieasant View Qrive soufih- bour�d, iookir�g �t County Road Fi. She d✓as also concer��d aboui th� e�farcement of fire codes and Yhe issue of snow plorn�ir�g. Cammissioner �rasaemle ir�quired iha� in light of #he changes, is i� S�a�fi's positi�n tc� sfiiil recommend deniai, and Directa� Sheld�n indicated, yes. �an Griffen, 29G5 County Road �, who lives directiy across from the proposed entrance of ihe parking {ot asked if the pian wa� to cut dawn al! of the existing trees to cre�te fihe parking lot. Director Sheldon reviewed fih� landscaping plan and indicated that 6 of the 12 trees proposed to be cleared are 20" aak trees. Chair Pefiersort explain�d thafi ihe P{anrting Comrni�sion wil[ be making a recommendaiion io the City Cour�cii v�ho wa�ld take final action on #he requesi. Ghair Petersar� clo�ed the p�blic hearing at 8:3� p.rrt. T�. s � , � « � ^ - : �• ♦. .•. �.-: � � _�, � R. __� � �, �� t � i i :� _ � � .. . . /� - � ..: Mounds View Planning Corrtmission Special Meefir�g - * _ � _ ; +., �..„ Apostolic Church �o construct a �hurch �acility a� 3025 �our�ty Road FI, a� amend�d. �ir�etor Sheldon sugg�sied to take fhe c��ng�s praposed in the hand-out an� drop the �rst i�em. related to fhe Fire Departrrt�n# since the applicant had propo�ed a way to solve the emergency ac�ess problem. Lynn 1/Vidseth, 3001 Ceur�ty Ro�d �f, wanted to icr�ovv if #he F�larrnir�g Commission recommends denial and it go�s to Ciiy Council, what wil! they do wiih ih� informafiion? C�air Peferson replied by saying that one o� the Pl�n�ing Corrtmission's main jobs is to make sure ih�t all iss�es are �xplored. Director Sheldon also replied by saying thai the City Cour►cil receives a staff r�por� along with the Planning . Commission's recommendation and a public hearir�g will be hefd by the Ciiy Council �r�d they wikl then make their decisit�r�. Commission Brasaemie exp�ained that this decision has noihing to do with #he ch�rch, its membership or his feelings toward 4he church. He was recommending denial because of Iot size and the fact tha� #he he believes i# io be an overdevelopment of ihe lof that is designated R-1, iow density use and he concurs with Staff s recorrtmendation fihai the height and size ofi the buiiding do nof fit 4h� surrounding area. He also expressed iha� he shares the concer�s wiih 4t�e surrounding property owners regarding the parking lot and its effect on property values, but stated ihat he understands property values tend not io decrease vvhen there is a ch�arch buift in a neigE�borhood. He stated t�at �h� p�rking !�f add� �n exiraordinary circumstance, and tP�at if this w�re a on� acre (ot �nd there w�r� mor� buffer, he �n+o�id have r�o probiem with the request. �i � � '. � r.', � � �;. .! � , _ , y. .. � �. . ! . ,s.. �r . - ` : s,� �- -- � '.�- Commis�ior�er �rook� vvas concerned �vifh hov� the churc#� fits ir� with the character of th� surrou�ding are�. Cammi�sion�r Miller stafied tha� sYre would hav� io go againsi fhis deniai because same of ihe items are fairly subjective and she quesfioned what is adeq�aafe and add�d that what is �dequaie for vn� person may not be adeq�aate for anafiher. She believ�s th�t ti�is is a situaiiort where peapie like �hings the v�ray they are �nd don'f w#�afi to ch�ng�, buf s�e feels if � property belongs 4o sorr�ean� ih�y sh�uld have ihe oppor�uni�y �o use �ha� property. She beEieves tha� the �ppiicant has gor�e tP�rough the cri�eri� �nd they have me� ��e parkir�g r�q�ir�mer�ts and �dded more bufFering fih�n the Code requires. Commissio�er Johnston sfated I�� beiieves that i� is too intense of � use for ihe loi and wv�Ed �ave na problem with a smaffer ch�arch. Commissioner Obert disagr�ed with the denial an the basis that the appiicant has done everything that fihe Cifiy has asked of them and believes �hai they have actually become more accommodating. He f�lt there has been some precedent already se4 in Mour�ds !/iew as far as the prope�#y of o�her churches. He believ�s somethir�g eise cart b� done yet fio modify the buffering issue and s�aggested that more research be don�. �ommi�sioner Stevenson does nc�i war�� people driving infio Mou�ds i/i�vu asking hov�+ d'[d they ever �liow a church developmertt iike fha4 irt �Vlound5 Viev�? He be[ieves �here is enough things here that vviil definitely make him vnte gor deniaf of the requesi. : . .;: � , ► _ `- • �„' `< �� lllr�u�ds i/iew Pl�nning Commis�iorr aS��C.Ia� ��eQfr1� � � - .+� � � ' � ' *. A .i R s � �: Chair Pefiersor� admifified thaf ihis has not been an easy case for him to decids artd he vvould iike to ihink �fi what is besi for the Ci4y, the rteighborhood, �nd what the rights are of fhe appli��nt, and how much hav� fihey been wiiling fio change to comply. He is a samewhat cor�cerned about the !ot size and the size of t�e parking lot, but he beEieves that. many things hav� b�en done to mak� if match our Code and h� do�s r�ot beiieve if to be a terrible thir�g for fhe neighborhood. � ayes �� aye� �; ; �; :: ,,, � , , . -'iV�otionLGarried: �ra�a�mie/�rooks fo �dopt �� ' Resolution N�: 4i6-96 r��ommending der�i�[ of ;-�,, '� the developmer�i revievv requesi for fhe fVew �po�tolic Church af 3025 Gounty Raad 6i. Commissioner Brasaemle indicafied that basicaily you cannot approve �he developmeni revi�w if you do no� approve the condifiiona! use permi#. Commissioner Brasaemi� amer�ded th�e mo#ion to include the ifems from ihe Staff hartdouf. The amendmenfs w�re approved by the seconder. 4 ayes 3 nays Community Developmen# Director Sheldon informed the Commission and citizens that fihey will be asking the Councii to set the hearing far #his case ai their next meeting on September 23rd. S�e informed the residen#s that those who received a previo�as no#ice regarding this case would receive a rtc�tice regarding the City Councif public hearing and indic�#ed that it i� sent to properfy owners rn�ithir� 350 �eet af i�te s�bject properfy. fUio�ion C�rriea Motion Carried 11�ound� \/ievv Plannir�g Commi�sir�rt Sepiember 18, 1996 �'; Sp�ci�l filleetir�g , Page � 5 ihere being r�a fur4h�r business before the 5. Adj��rnmeni Planning �ommissior�, Chair Peterso� adjaurned the meeting at 9:00 p.m. FZespec4fully submitted, � - .. � . �!- ,��,__ � �,�� Item ��5 - �E��T T+OIZ I�I.AN�II�d� CO�I�ISSIOl� ACT'�OI� IViee�an� I)af�: October 2, 1996 Sta�`12epoe-� by: Pannela �heldon, Communiiy Development Director Plansaa�g Ca�e 45%-96 �'+ iie I�to.: Requesto The appli�ant is requesting a 20 foot variance from the 30 foot setback requirement io aIlow construction of a three season parch 10 feet from the rear property line, Petitionero Locatiors: ,;1.;'�_ Zor�ing/Lancl IT�eo Appiacabl� Reguiations: Ronald Gardner 848Q Pleasant View Drive 06-3 0-23-22-0072 The property is currently zoned R-I Singie Family Residential Section 1044.01, Subd 3., requires a 30 foot rear yard setback. Section 1125.42 states the criteria for review of variances as follows: a. Exceptionai or eYtraordinary circumstances apply to the properties which do not apply generaity to ather properties in the same zone or vici�ity and result from lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over which the owners of the property since the effective date hereof have had no control. b. c. d. e. f. The literat interpretatian of the provisioas of this Title wouid deprive the applicant of rights commanly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the tenns of this Title. That the special conditions or circumstances do not result from tlze actions of the applicant. That granting the variance requested wiII noi confer on the applicant any speciai privilege that is denied by this Title to owners or ather lands, structures or buildings in the same districk. That the variance requested is the minimvm variance which would atleviate the hardship. Economic conditions alone shati not be considered a hardship. The variar►ce wouid not be matenatly detriznenial to the purpose of this Title or to other property in the same zone. Planning Case No. 457-96: 84R0 Pleasant View Drive October 2, 1996 Page 2 g. The proposed variance will nat innpair an adequate supply of Iight and air to adjacent property or substantially incrrease the congestion of the public streets or increase the danger of %re or endanger the public safety or substantially dizr�inish or impair property values within the neighborhood. The Board of Adjustment and Appeals may impos� such restrictions and conditions upon the premises beneiited by a variance as may be necessary to camply with the standards established by thzs Title or to reduce or mitumize the effect of such variance upon other properties in the neighborhood and to better carry out the intent of the variance. tlttach��nfs: Planning Applicatian Zoning Map Plot P1an Floorplan Hardship Statement Resolution 478-9b �ackground: The appiicant is requesting a variance to replace an existing deck wifh a three-season porch on l�is property at 34$0 Pleasant View Dr�ve. The property is located on a cul-de- sac; therefore, the lot is an irregular shape and restricted the placement of the home at the time of construction. The house was built in 1977, and is located 22 feet from the rear property line. The applicant has indicated in his letter that the setback requirements at the time were different, Staffhas researched the Zoning Code and found that the rear setback requirement was 20 feet in 1960, and was changed to the current 30 feet in 1970. We understand that Mr, Gardner was the owner of the property when the house was buiit and did receive a building pez-mit for construction of the house. The certificate of survey from i 977 shows the house in its present location. We do not know why the house was allowed to be buiit at 22 feet. The porch would replace a deck which was outside sliding gIass doors from the dining room in the Gardners' home. The applicant has provided the City with fioor plans for the house. (A copy of this area is attached,) They have indicated thai there is no other practical way to arrange the doorway from the dining room except to tke rear yard. � The appticant has submitted a hardship staternent regarding his request. Mr. Gardner has stated that he does have an irregular shaped iot which requires that the house be pushed backward toward the cear property line, and makes ii di�cult to add any improvements on the rear of the house. He notes that many of the neighbors have three-seasan porches, so ailowing the variance would not grant a special privilege. Without the variance, he wouid be deprived of an improvement which many of his neighbors enjoy. He indicates that the porch wouid be screened from his nei�hbor's property by existing trees. �`j Planning Case No. 457-96: 8480 Pleasant View Drive Ociober 2, 1996 Page 4 Anaiysis/�2�com mendatron o The lot in question is pie shaped because of the cul-de-sac, and does present practical difiicuIties in locating the house on the lot. The property owner desires to convert the area which has been used for a deck to a three season porch. T'he deck has been removed but served a sliding giass door on the upper level o�the house. The house is split level in design and therefore the door is approximately 14 %ei above grade. It is the applicani's desire to use the existing design of the house, the arrangement of the dining room and the location of the siiding glass door in adding the porch to the house. If no improvements ar� made, the sliding glass door wilt open into space. The Zoning Code ailows decks off the main level of the house to encroach to within two feet of the property iine {5ection 1104.Oi Subd S.c.) Three season porches, which are enclosed structures, are not given this same allowance and cnust comply with the building setback. The change proposed by the appiican� from a deck io a three season porch means different ruIes that apply, and a variance is requ�red. The three season porch would be 10 feet from the rear property line, with the bottom edge ; ti 10 above grade. The applicani has indicated that they will be enclosing the area between the decic and the ground level to make it more aitractive but not to finish it as a useable room. The neighbor's house is on the opposite side oithe lot from where the porch would be located. The porch will be facing the open side yard on the abutting property and wili be screened by trees. The pocch will be appro�mately 60 feet from the nearest side property 1ine. Staff iZecommendation: Adopt the attached resolution approving a reduction in the rear setback requirement from 30 feet �0 10 feet for construction of a three season porch at 848� Pleasant View Drive; Planning Case No. 457-96. cc: Ronald L. Gardner, 8480 Pleasant View Drive, Mounds View MN 55112 - �` "� `� S � _ ii i �, ., � A. .... A . .. . , _... �` �� yI �_ . # ,� _ �- : �_ _ . , . Ir�ferest irt Pr�{�erty � � � � � p�'70t12 7��, ° 7$`✓,� (e�ecSc appraQriate bax): . Owmer ofi Properiy Cantract far Deed O�er Lessee, Operafor, Man�ger �gre�merrt ta Purc.�as� Other {expiain} ' �ocumeer�ry. evider� r� apPlic�nis im�r�t in �t� prc,aecry rrtay b� r�uired hefc�� finaI Co �Y �an af �i� r�qu�c P9�P�iY I�lVUL�/�D� " AadieSS/Geli@r'a� LaCaii�tl � g�a ��EIqSRM% JtW DR�v� S�/!� ov.vd,� U �� w L�gal Desc,�p�ort or Properiy ldentir�catior� Num�er i,�/1��TE DA � 7°,�s M�,�D s:D� 06 0 � f ' L oi L��a1 Owner: �arr�e/Addr�ss o�*��1 �. � R p�v�� / �o PL�RS a7`' U/E�sv ARrt/E Pres�ni Us� {ct�ec:c a�prapriate bax)� ��sds V��w /V, � Q Urtdevelnp�d/Vac�nf � Singl� r�rr�ily �veelling ', � Dupl�x/iwo Famii� �wdling - , ._ - . -- - �--_ ,_ _.. - -- ---- � -----. .. _ . .. __. , C� Mu(t�-�amiiy (Na. a� Ltn� � _ . _ . . " _� Q SusirtessJCammer�al EsiablisHment Q lrtdustrial �si�lishment � [� � Other (ex�lain) Praperty Cass�catisn: �' Abstracm � i arrens � '°!ease nore: A�nticarn �ay be r�s�nslcle fer aaciiiortiai f�s assoeiaced �Ni$1 the CevteW QT this rer�uest ��"{�:9E�°� a�� 'f�tT I�°,�� r1�ov� S�r1TR�i�i 1�f"iE i 1 i1� � }�i.l s� f �aa'�raxatie��aa�aRSas��u��x=�-er �i�RS�iJfe ��s��arra�y� a��WS��w�a�r�vrse sss��x�sssisaa�� W s� aa�1 Us� r��emi� Caa'� ,koo�el ��raiaa.;Sit� Ptati e�via�a AAinor SuDaivisaan i9eior SuDaivissarr ��' n9. 9fart arnandmem 'Netland ,�iter�ior► Psrmii `Nadanci 8uries r�srm�t +�anning Sign r'UD P�JD Amerrdmertr S'aOQ/acri�. ;r�inimurn SZOa. �7taaamum 51,060 R-t � ri-2 - S� �. ssE aettea:s �CA A-1 � A-2 - �;°5. .�1 a�9°iers 52W Si 5 SiOt}/ae:�. ;rrrnirrtuarr 10a. -sr�aamum �u0 S7 �A S25Q pild� J'6a0 deoOSic SsCd S59 oius daocsrt ce�ereninea ::v S;� S�Q � �fl �� .3tSII Qaco �r 5rtie# �°..on APP9C�iVE� � CJ�dJ1E� � TAa� '�: �} 5 7 - �`1 CA � �amirs. ,�c�.urre ��_ � �n I -�1 Ps�is Fuund O�i�an � 0� ?;ad �siox Nurncsee Tata! �eea Psi� 0� �� A�aiOY NUa4rc,�P .�ddiiicrval r°s� r ad Cats r��d r"�siae Nump�r 0� � �.z- �`s p!�nning Cas� ��a. --� %,j S -� -�. cY � i �; {;. � � f \ _�v� �� .�._ �—�'`��J . °° °. . . � � . ..,� . . .�NORTH�—COUIV"(`P a . � � �'�l �.�j � S49 N ry g 8'i� �4� � •m �9 � N ° �_4r n� 84 9 N`w ' n 849� ' 848 8485 8484 8�89 gqgp � gag N � `V n N 8490 8d77 848U &479 8� &+85 8462 8470 8�7 8�484 8�461 9468 848y 847d et69 8465 eb70 8474 8475 8474 0 8460 8B8 B46 •845 845 0 B�Sa � 8465 g� p 8�3 8d56 8461 84fi0 845 �s � Ba65 �� 8&54 8455 845 8459 8450 e,},5$ 8� �9 d 845$ 845+ e saaz saas a4as s�aa �a ea+a eaa� sas4 � : 8�34 84J1 8436 9425 g.q�p � 8434 84�8 8431 � 8�39 8435 8434 gg 8421 84�0 , qr 84?9 9R32 8.4Z4 8425 8434 841 8471 8�21 o g423 �2 Bbt9 8�0 8425 9424 Hkt5 OG 5418 �1Q 0 8415 8414 • 8�02 0 8401 8419 &L20 84qB 8392 8A01 8406 8408 8406 8392 833 8408 8467 &4t 8475 8414 �py n 8384 9390 8,",69 �9� 8�� S�Q �8 a9 �� 8378 8�89 8400 8379 �$ • 8385 8387 8391 . � 8409 '8398 � 37 8379 8380 8373 8370 838U 8391 8388 � 8380 9385 8387 8382 37 r m 8385 �a 8�60 8389 8778 ^,,, � 876 � 8370 rj 8371 8374 8383 8372 9371 8368 0 8369 � 8360 �� 83b8 8350 . 838 8371 , 938 8355 834 8355 835q �� 8.364 8345 �� 'v/ 8360 8360 w eJ59 �60 �� 835i 8346 83� 8331 8330 ��-- 5335 835Q 8355 �,7 B:S47 8358 gu� 8343 8�d2 8329 8312 8315 8320 � • 834Q 8335 �� 9 833�4 asas o asss a�a 8338 O 8115 8300 �.703 8370 � 8330 �5 8325 @33p ��3 8370 8333 8322 8305 8290 H295 8Z90 (� 8320 8315 8322 � B32t � r'} 8J25 9J16 Z 8.325 8300 8285 8280 � 82�7 8280 � �..1� 83i0 8315 8371 8308 x�1 8275 8270 g g281 8270 U . 8380 &70S �312 8297 8Z96 �4 GROV�(�!0 8ag5 82� � 8273 easo 8284 8285 8290 8289 8280 82� P�p�� ,55 8Z50 8267 Sa� 9280 8275 8281 8250 8261 �� m ,n n'— 8240 8261 �� 827t7 8265 823 8241 `,m, N ''a n r�+ . n n r. W � 8270 � 9255 AR4AN �'+ cv w cv 8230 8255 N AV� 825� � 8255 a m n I a . � 8248 . o 0 0:' � .- � N m o $ ,� i° �° 5220 � 8250 � 82¢J� N N (V M :' tV N N� (V I lV N N cV f`Q (V N ~ s— ' B24o P 8233 8228 8�45 820& �7 `�0 8210 82? 1 Q 82 8213 8202 �� r v z SZ3 —. SZ�O 8ZS% HiSH �ZOS N N I N N 2 8t9 C 820! 0� St92 Q 820 � 22 � 8177 82� 819t �� 82U8 �� m�0 8175 � 12 n 83 St80 8175 8i60 q� � n 8200 ^N N� N 81 ai65 � �� 12 8t 1 Si 60 ,^n � 81 a� p LAPOf� 8155 � a� C � ei�% j eiBi W N a; +-1 N O O el� BY4S ;� r . QO}i 5156 J�/ N`�a �+ : 8138 �i c`��a N c�`�e � 8735 � r+ � �� d �\t� �—� 8141 o p�F 2 8132 8727 8125 8i30 Sf3 � > f \. rn W m ?� 811 n vf � m w n� r �n 'n � B�3i N tV lV N N Nf tV � O O �D u9 �r a n �`1 m � m o0 m h h ie P P ^ n 8i !J � e�\ 81 1 1 � m�s 8106 N iy cv cv cv c+e cv �a <v ew �v cv � `V 890 � � \ \ \ \ � �OB � N N N m !� � ro �OHQ � SOS7 N I • � �� ' N N $Q�O �Q�S B�SAi a� EO%a 80%1 � O' 8075 gpg 8fl59 � � `�' 80da � , I f I\\' %` ��3 fj'�Q 8030 80�5 8038 8Qs5 St140 SQ39 �� y 8025 � ♦. aoza aozs so2s e�� aaa eoas 1 \ ' 801fi � �� ( � \\ 7980 SqOS 8000 8005 �� 8009 � i � � 7490 �9� 8004 7981 (� �� ( Vicinity Map: 4.57-�96 �� h � 848Q Pleasant View Drive I �i N � �� Ra A�plicant: Ronald Ln Gardner 12 `�,° ' 8Q88 808& 8050 8042 ao.�a sots 80QS 7990 � , U� � Sovr ' �r ' 4 � t � i � i ,. ��'�� ., I �'- u � i,� �N � � I ��°�(L�°.�'�� , f�'-o" �� Ca'�a, � � G�u_�E� . W�w -. Z.2.X�`� � Mu� Tg'_�Laft� �' � - � -- - 12� � � 19 ��t�r I 2� e' � -- � , �a��— p �� he :Yj � . . �G��✓_ .�i � � � -� ' � t9' . `n ,k0 — � � '; � �:�r�ty .-- -- - - � 1�',v�� - � � � � � � �� 3�t �DJ Hl t�le:.:�_ � ; •,hB[st.�;u�d, , '�r-�.a�� Yap -� � V �_�Gdd, -if '_ ' - � - -r�__�� _,.- � . --�1.. ---- - _ _�� ``' � : _� , ---- -- � . �_ �- � � . � _ ,� 1 �'� - � ; a .� _ � � � � 1 -� �, N �� ! H� � = � lU ��r�cc�h -*- }� � - t�cL�r.R. . ,�� e°� j� \ � ` `�- I 1 � �t � ,. ' � r�i �, � .,a ` __ � J� � � � �� - 1 � - � � � � � � � �� ` ��: o o ,� - � 3� 3e � ��_� b�� '— j ` °� � ' 1 �, � - , �.� � � � ' ; _ � L =°.� i` ,': _ � ��- _�� ,, � � �4��, . _ - , f � , �,d � �;� , _ _Y ! � . - `�� ; .a ; � ,1 �J � ' ' i r � � �, ,\ , __ � L. � _ {}{ � r �� . 13 � • ' � , . . J 1 k a�% "� V — � �' - .�/ 'r�QL' \ �'�° �� (�'� ` � f � ( � - 1a�° ,�. } - � ; � I � t � ` � � '. - ; t � � `1Pi �� I �:= ,l fi t!1 i � � � ��-' � � j � � � � � � , � j I ,�, � „� I � I - f�� p�" � _ `''- s�` Z�� V I . � _� � � + �� , , I i � 4 �; � � �i�' L 1 �� \ ' ; � �� 2 J ,� ` -� i � �. ; in ' __ ;1 � �1JG . i ( } o� �''�f . __ �'i'"��'�'�/1 — +� _ . , � --- !� i , - ; � ' `� ; � � � __ i � 1` �� ..; � ` � e � I � t i y' - � ,, v � - � , 41 � _ = ; � i ` ! �"� - ml 7�1°� � _ , - ` ��kmp;' I � , � ` i I � -- � � � T ' .'i = _�� li�+� � � � �~ ' i � _ � � i . �"� � . ' 7�X��i� - ' "��o �b ` , � —� --- � i u , .. t �, , � ' `=� �° C, . t % ° � . . r� � rJ , � � � 8480 Pleasant View Drive I'�unds View, MN SS1I2 September 8, 1996 Ms. Pamela Sheldon Corr�nunii�y Development Director Czty of Mocznds View 2401 Highway 10 Movnds View, MN 55�12-J.499 Re: Planning Case 457-96 • / ,` � �y �� '1, `, ,�,�' 19 �1 ' ��a��j �� ; + . � C�� _�,� � ` ., o`��ds y�� -;;�� , ,_ �- , • J�, Thank you for in�o.rming me that my application for a variance to construc� a three-season porch is tentatively scheduled for Septembe.r lga I am happy to provide the additional infarmation rec�uested in your Septembe� 4 le�ter to explain how I feel i meet the c�iteria in -the Zoning Codee � believe a vaxiarcce should be granted to a11ow me to construct a three- season porch in the same location as an existing decko The following circumstances, cited in the Criteria for Ap��aval of Variances, will im�OSe an undue hardship, as well as practical dif�icul.ties, to me and my family in the future use and enjoyrr�ent of our home and property, a. The size and shape of my lot is quite dif�erent frora other properties in �he vicinityo M� lot is of an irregular size which does not have the r�quirEd rear property Iine setback. At the time my home was built in 1977, the zoning codes were di.ffexent than �hey; ;a�,.� -��ay. T was al.lowed to build my home, with a deck, with a shor�er rear property I.ine setbacko As �he zoning codes axe written today, I would have practical difficulties wi�h construction of anything that 2 would do a-� the rear of my property, inclucling replacing an existing deck. b. My family and I wouid be deprived of the rights coErQnonly enjoyed by °�' n�i9hbars°-the enjoyment of a three-season porch such as many of my neighbors naw enjoy. co The Zack of the required rear proPerty line setback does not resuit from my own actions, bu� rather frem the zoning codes -Fhat were in existence when I purchased t}le 1.0� and built my home and the irregular shape of the lot. T chose the lot becaus2 T found it a pleasant location and did not }�elieve that the irxegu�.� shape would at sorne poin� become a detriment to future plans. �° G�"antinq this varzance wi1.7. not allow rae any special privil�es as many of my neighbors have �ea-season porches and/or large decks. eo I assure you that shoE.i.Id rhis variance be granted, it would be the mi-nimum variance allowed to construc-t the three-season porcho No further encraachment, o�her t.han -that requixed, would l�e requestedo This zs not a matter of economic hardship, but rather the hardship of not being able to enjoy a portion of our home and propertyo � Ms. Pamela Sheldon Septe�nber $, 1996 Page '�ao i f< I can see na reason why the a�proval o�' ti�e vaxiance would in any way 1� materzally defiximental to the p�pose of the zoning cod� or to other pro�erty ira the same aone. g. The proposed vaz�iance will not impai� an adequate supply of light o� air to the adjacent prop�.rtyo The porch woul.d be bareiy visibie to the..�.. neig�bors direc�.ly behind my property, and only then through an existing raw of matux'e tr2es and across their very deep backyards, making it almos� invisible �o the neighl�oring home owners. Since the porch is at the rear of my home, away �rotn the street, no congestian would occuro There would be no increase zn the danger of fire or public safety since the proposed porch is well away �rcm the neighboring homeso Having a well designed and well buzlt porch would only add to the property values wittzin the neighborhood, ,.:not d�minish or i.mpair themo In closing, T appreciate the Planning Co�tnt�ission taking my request for a variance into considerationo I trust that T have provided you wi�h clear and accurate information as to why I feel that a deniai of my request�would create an undue hardship, as well as a.prac�ical difficulty, in the ftit�e use and enjoyment of my home and praperty. Shouldl you desire further informa�.ian or clarzfication, pleas� fee� free to con�act me. ` � Sincerely, Ronald Lo Gardner t�iyLo-�-o° i ; :�; �, , �, � , , .. � r�� ; ��. � ; _ �; �, � � , � , , r . , ;, � ;r- . -� ��; �. �; , �� . , � � .: � t� �� ;:: • : ,...'. . . . �; -'..,. . � �► :R.. • . .�"�... -• ,, ,` ...,:; ' ''�`, ; �� _ '! � . �•, . !f.�- ', � 1 : ', ' ��: �'', . �. E.� i ... � : '. :��:. � . ;. .•- �. ; �. . ;� . .I' . , ,. �.:• ! : � . . . .,/�" i ,�, i� ; :' �. .. �. I � .': , �. . , ; � , ' 1 , WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed Yhe request of Ronald L. Gardner to ailow a 10 foat rear setback w�ere 30 feet is required for the consiruction of a three season porch at �480 Pleasant View Drive; and, WHEREAS, this property is in the R-1 single family residentiai district and is located on a cui-de-sac which causes the lot to be irregular in shape; and, V�HEREAS, the Plaruaing Commission has reviewed the criteria used to evaIuate variar�ce requests; and, . WHEREAS, the appiicant presented a hardship statement to the Piannir�g Commission statir�g that the lot is irregular in shape which has caused the house to be constructed closer to the '' rear lot line than is typical and which makes it difficult to add improvements to the rear of the '`� ; house; and that three season porches are a typical innprovement in this neighborhood and allowing '�'� for the porch to be built vvouid not be granting a special privitege; and, �, , WHEREAS, the exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to this property in that the lot is inegular in shape, and required that the house be built closer to the rear lot line than is typical for this district; and, WI�REAS, the literal interpretation of the provisions oithis Titie would deprive the appiicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district in that three season porches are a typical improvement in this neighborhood and eisewhere in the R-i single family residential district; and WHEREAS, special conditions or circumstances do not resuit from the actions of the applicant in that the proposed Iocation of the porch is necessitated by the �acation of the existing house, the existing sliding glass door, and the floor plan for the dirung room where the porch will atfiach to the house; and, WHEREAS, grantin� the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any speciaf privite�e that is denied by this Title to owners or othee lands, structures or buildings in the same district in thai three season porches are a typical improvement for single family resiclences; and, Planning Commission Resolution 478-96 October 2, I996 Page 2 WHEREAS, the variance rec�uested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship in that the existing residence is located 22 feet from the rear property lir�e, and the applicani is requesting to replace an existing 12 %ot wide deck with the three season porch, which will aiso be 12 feet wide. This width is the minimum amount needed to allo�v the porch to be fi.inctional. V4THEREAS, the variance would not be maierially detrimental Yo the purpose of this Titie or to other property in the same zone in that the porch will be locaied in an area which is at least 60 feet from the nearest side properiy iine, and is at the opposite end of the common property Iine shared with the neighbor to the north, from the locaiion of the northern neighbor's hause. The porch will be screened from ihe northern neighbor's property by trees, V�IHEREAS, the proposed variance wiil not impair an adequate supply of light and air ta adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets ar increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair praperty values within the neighborhood in that there is adequate screening and distance between the porch and adjacent residences. NOW, THEREF4RE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Mounds View Pianning Commission ? acting as the Board of Adjustment and Appeals approves the variance request of Ronald L. Gardner for a reduction in the rear setbaek requirement from 30 feet to 14 :Feet for construction of a three season porch at 84$Q Pleasant View Drive. Ado�ted this Znd day of October, 1996. ATTEST Jerry Peterson, Chairman Pamela Sheldon, - Community Development Director itetn ��b - Q��`I' �� Y�� Y�� f�� `'� ; I�ee�in� �➢ateo 4ctober 2, 1996 Staff �2e��rt bye Pamela Sheidon, Community Development Director > :; Ptannan� Case File l�T000 l�eqe�es�o Petatio�e�°: I.acationo I'''1"- ' ,. Zor��a�� Iaa�ed LT�e: Appia��ble TZeg�siatioe�s: 45 �-9b The applicant is requesting a variance in the building setback between a residence and a detached garage from the required six feet to three fe�� Vic & Son Construction on behalf of property owners Terry and Anne Jacobson 7090 Knollwood Drive 07-30-23�34-0012 The property is currently zoned R-1, Single Family Residential Section 1 i06.03, Subd lc., requires accessory buildings to 6e six feet (6'} or more frorn any other building or structure on the same lot. SecYion 503.3 of the Uniform Buiiding Code states that for the purpose of determining �h� required wali and opening protection, buildings on the sanne property shall be assumed to have a property line between them. When a new building is erected on the same property as an existing building, the disiances �roin the assumed property line is used to determir�� walis in either the existing or the new building must be fire rated. For single family horr��s and detached garages, walls within 3 feet of the assumed property line must be fire rat�d. Section 1125.02 states the crite�ia far review of variances as foilows; a. EYCeptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to tixe praperties which do not appl� generaily to other properties in the same zone ar vicinity and resuIt from lot size or shape, topogaphy or other circumstances over whieh the owners of the property since the eff��i�r� date hereof have had no control. L:� The Iiteral interpretation of the provisions of this Titie would deprive the applicant of rights cominonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this Titie. ", c. That ihe special conditions or circumsfiances do not result from the actions of the appii�arzt. Planning Cas� No. 458-96: 7090 Knollwood Drive Octobec 2, 1996 Page 2 d. That granting the variance requested wili not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this Title io owners or other lar�ds, structw°es or buildings in the sarne district, e. That the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the laardship. Economic conditions alone shal� not be considered a hardship. £ The variance would not be materially detrimentai to the purpose of this Title or to other praperty in the same zone. g. The proposed variance will not iunpair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properiy or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substar�tialiy diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. The Board of Adjustment and Appeals may impose such restrictions and conditions upon the premises benefited by a variance as may be necessary to compiy with the standards estabiished by this Title or to reduce or minimize the effect of such variance upan other properties in the neighborhood and to better carry out the intent of the variance. Attaehrnents: Planning Apptication Zoning Map Diagram showing relationship of buildings (approximated from aerial photos) Construction Drawings (reduced) Diagram showing dimensions between buildings Hardship Statement Resoiu#ion 479-96 �ackgrouaad: The appiicant hired Vic & Son Construction to construct a second story addition and a rear entrance to their home to protect the back door fram weather. It consists of an enctosed landing and flight of steps. There is an existing garage behind the house which was not shown on the buiIding plans. The rear entrance has been constructed and is located within 3 feet 4 inches of the garage. Staffdiscovered the problem with the distance between the rear entrance and the garage when inspecting the canstruction. The garage was not shown on the building plans. Section I lOb.03 Subd. l.c. requires accessory buildings io be at least six feet from any other buiiding or structure on the same lot. The appIicant is requesting a variance to allow the rear entrance to be less than the six foot requirement of the Zoning Code. ;� , _ Planning Case No `p October 2, 1996 Page 3 458-96: 7090 ICnollwood Drive t�na�ysES/ �te�o�mer�dat�ono The rear entrance was placed in �he only iogical iocaiian available given the location of the back door. The sie�os are directed ioward the garage rather than away from the garage, and provide easier access than if the flight of steps were reversed. The distance from the corner or the rear entrance �o the camer of the garage is 3 feet 4 inches. The iwo buildings do not actuaily overlap. The garage is 7 feei 8 inches from ihe back wall of the house (see atiached diagram). The Building Code requires thaf if the entrance remains, either the wall of the entrance or the wail of the garage must be fire rated. Adding 5/8" sheetrock to the walls of the garage is su�cient to meet the reguirement. Staff Recorr�rnendation: Adopi the attached resolution approving a reduction in the setback requireznent from six feet to three feet between the principal residence and an accessory garage building to allow construction oi° an enclosed rear entra,nce for the residence at 7090 Knollwood Drive; Pianning Case No. 458-96. cc: Vic & Son Construction, 10020 Olive St. NW, Coon Rapids, MN 55433 Terry �. Anne Jacobson, 7090 Knollwood Drive, Mounds View, MN 551 i2 `�o,�o�ye 11:v-e` P':�1.L 813 i8-1 3�16:.� CIil OF 3LV _ C�OD2/004-5 � f�f}�� y �� ' I J' � �� l96�iL��.se°:b� i.�� ' t /if�� . . dll,r � � �� . . �D��: �/�/� i-� �/.,_ a_.� �'° �1�_ra } _, � n � _ 0 ---, :.�-:.��.�� '' * � ; 1 j� _ � . • _�..f f �: - _� • ,r.l .- � .�+ � � � - � � . r. ' ) '� ♦ i ; � � � ` , i = �� _ �., 1,, �� ,'�T � � ., , . _. _.__. �.— , e r_ �. ;_�-: .,. � r . � � ..., . , : ;...:. ' � MI . - � _ ...._ ...,�� . � / r / :e s � _r. T,. _ _ _ . � ... _. �•. � � .�r�. . �� ,_ .. � � ,. �. ._�� ._��r.--�� P�s�f tJs,� (c�7er� �g�ra�cia� b�cj: Q llnd�ap�/+l�e� � Sia�gte �� 0�� , - . � . _. _ Mu1�'�� (��af Urx� �4 -. � —�_ _ . . . - , .. . . ` ��.�.�, �:.�.�-,w,�r�.,,,. `� Q �usdn�d�mm �m�r2 ' a f� �ht�i � B�� (e��i►y) �•1�`i� -_>_� ,-�-r,-s:"r.T:C __ _' �.i, � ��l�'£�� i .« , . ,_,. �. : � ,. ■ - / j� �.�� r �i� ., �� : . . �Ln � : :� � �� Cf 1�11� Cp�� a � � . : .-.. _ .. . . ,,.. . . 'r. - : .••'�.�-�.;5 ;. -, � �� .. .. . , ' . . . . _ , ,_ , ; ,A �-.:,_: � , ..- ��s t - . - ,� ' � � - z'..i � �,__,:. � _ - -°;. <.- ..:n-, �.�!F: _ - -..., ..:-� .. ...._....,. � _ . ,.� .._. ,,. s _- - � �. ir� . �. _ .. , .;, , �:., �.... ' � .:.=_.^ ... �� ., s ., �R - , r i � -- . __. ___. _ - - ► � _� _..z � • , .-:� - .. �, __ �x � .. � �._ _. �...::: ,: .�. . �.,...... �. �. ,,_;.,. ,,.., ° - .: .. ,: - � . :. . ��_.: r. .:�,,, _ , . - ,;� � .,. ._ .. <:... ., -.. : . ... �. ,.,,, � . _ .._ _ _. , .... - �, �,; _e ., -=.. , _� _ .- _ • ._ - � �, ,w;..- .... y <._e ..�: ....:. . _., _ _,_ . .... . � � �I, � � �. � -� _ S i!"�-� + .... � � � . � / t ;. �. I-. � E° �i � j ;1 �i I � � ,.��: - � �s�as 7ss o 7sas 7sso > ....., �s'so � _. �� 7525 7538 Y 754 X 7515 75d5 7� �F � _ � _ �s+o �; n o � n g 750 n N 7500 ry N N rv s � ��o�s�� D�� T � n °n °n » n 7474 7489 q � 7490 74�85 m 50 r. o, I 49 N N N %�Jo �� 7457 7485 7474 7471 747 -- 7462 8RQN50td 74 4� ( i 45�6 7456 .r m - 1 7407 74-48 7445 745 745t � om ��,�,y ¢2 - N �`1 �s �, 7425 7�d30 7438 7434 � 7415 7�2 � 74� 42 ^ � �p 7405 7440 � V1E'�� 7475 746 7405 7472 7�5 7do8 73s - -; i• z 73ss �aoo �3a ^ � v f' 7385 7380 � 7�9 7382 738 cr'v �< 7390 II 7375 �3� � 7365 7J60 7375 378 Pi i �� 7365 737 n `i.° 7350 � � 32 34 7�� 7373 � 737 7� �' J 32 J 7 � �.y n�f 736 n `' � iar n +n ^ o� - 33 e� �n nP e+ - 7317 N � P 7338 �76`�' '� � o 0 0 o g °o rn � rn � � m��^ m 'n 7310 ^� �� E n M1 i°7 M7 P7 1°1 N N N N fV � � S N N � � i�� -:� p ON N � 0 � �r°, N m � � . ( �t : m � �- � a � o � . � m � � m 7235 � ; � ` 0 0 0 o c rn m rn a`�i a� rn °a o � Qy °� Z 8-i � I n nN N 5278 5%7 52" L'. � Yl n Ih Ml N N N N !V M N C`} ' N N N a ` 7 38 5z7a 5z7 sZ- � 28 1e 75266 526 sy szso sas� �' �; o= s� P 7234 7237 725U p a 57 5254 525 Q� ! � St7 5t7 5248 �4 � ,r � �: 7226 7225 72 ,� ; �: 7200 7�75 719 517 g17 52<2 5T4 ^ i � 7188 7447 R�.� 517 517 5236 52S 5230 523 2� �, 7372 �5 778 St70�5t6 5224 5� 2: 0 0 7�� -� a+ in n rn ^ SE6 5t6 5218 5� � n cr ^ o 0 2 `•. n � o °n n � tf N N � c�v N N �5166516 521z 52Y 5� �. � roi M iNOOD �R � 51 51 5�p6 5217 �. 5� � N v N w �O � ` g o N °> n N 7100 7095 r�i cmv r c�v 7Q9 Si625t6t 5205 Si ; N 1O .,•� "� 7Q44 p WQOD 4 51.� 5201 S' 0 7092 „�° p°.� � 7� 07 5 t 43 S f 40 514 5. I .� 7082 0 7095 � 707 . 5141 7074 � 06 5�3 5132 St33 5- 7072 7064 Y �� o �-Z Ob0 � N nP o m 5133 5124 5125 C 5. 705a 7057 7 m m m '° , 7� �� r No� � 0 GREST 'Z � szis sT�7 �' s - 7034 5 704 �OOD CR,F�T � J PARK N 51 t 9� 5148 5109 7028 51t� 5` %OZG %O,I N� N N N � P� N SIO�% � S1OO SiO! S. ' '� 701 m °' m � � '� N N 6986 a I p � 504 509 ��97.) N 509 9 5[ 69 1 2940 � a, 5086 5 � 508 SO8 $086 SC 697� 6Q7 �32 n �" 96 6960 50 �7 gpg 50 508 �� 5C � 6952 6453 � � w 68 695� SOi� 507 507 5071 S07 5. 69'd9 5d66� 506 � 5066 50 506 6942 fl- fi9�Q � N N G9a 6945 � 506 506 5 �� 5059 �% 5460 505 506 505 5: z SOSa 5� SC . 6928 b929 N P o fi92 �� ' n ii '° o 0 5054�505 O 5D 505 � O �9�0 O O � N N � N N N N N N N SOQE �,' S�"� SO4S 5� �.am.�4a..4P..m.-r+��• �� @� � . � _�.�� .v ��.e.r�r.o...�.�..re.a..�r�d.e �..m�.mvw r ��. . � � •. � � �,\ � ;�� . Vicinity �iapo 458-96 � 7090 ICrxollwood Drive � ADD1iCartt: `I�c & Snn f'nncYr,��r;.,,-, C700'] 5cale: 1" = SO feet 7090 Knollwoad Drive Planning Case No. 458-�96 Approximare Iocations based on aerial photographs � i, :) I � ' � 1 � � � ° � -�1 m � � � � C -��- ---- tt�Mt ... NtMl.- . --�-� '---� . .- : ; ..-. . .--.- . . :I fYlM1 n�Ml i,� ais-ib �d a'r��, �1 Q c�v-!b da o�,rb e:_ . • ' . ° / / ��,� � � � , �� j ' � ; _- a i _ ' I °' 2 1 '. . ' �,°o - 4 ' . I I . ' i°xGDOM • rw� a+ � ' � �� , � -� � r l. " � � ^ . �1- i � 7 � � , r a . � . � .� � �y I � �fb � � f ' I ; � . . '" � - - ` ' ^' i , � i • ' � I , �, _ - �90 ICn.ollwooc{. I}rive . •_` �ons�ruction .Drawings' fox-� 2nd Floor Additian & � .'`::R;�ar Entran�e . - � _ ;� "='Fla�ning.Case Noa 458-96.. ' - � � o: v�.� t � � � Z W � ;_. f � � � S° 3g4 U� � - - _ — �\ � � � Rear Entrance - ' ,.h � 0 o � �� 4° X O � � b � � :°°' house / ; ; f� /: % %` � / ' �� /.�� // / / � � � � � / �� , �;'�;, %, , ,///�/,;' , ��,'/ ,,// ,; ' /; �, �;,;%/`//�`/`�'% �i 7r8�� rear entrance ;-f��%ii�%'� 3' �„ � � i, � 11 feet - --�� .� � • i � a� a� w � Planning Case Noe �a5$°�9G 7090 Knollwood Drive Dimensions between builda.ngs � , , r� �� 1_�� _ _ �� _ t ��J1� � r . y�j, � UV _;� � i,k.�. ��y.y//yy�' •^'/( q({{{{�p Y 1 �j A 1 //��--+� 6r�--V-�° I�—!� �[_�+-1�-✓=�--Y-W,_� KvE/h'�LJ�.�h.�:L�B[=�n��V ��_.C� � ' �tD�`-�?� C�r�' � �iN�1(� . ,_ � _ ^ , - � 0 '�'�11 � �,�`�� 1LLU_L.i_I I _ . � . . �� ( VV�v C�8"i�(J I.trL.iC�_�yY�/_CL�l.q4L7 . r 'v._ (j l� _ ��n.�? - �_�? c�va�� -�. ��;��t��.��.___. _ __ __ __� __ ^ - �' �. . ��..�ic?,�� _ --- _ _ i f :� . � : . . , ;� . ; � �. . �; . . �, , , � : � , , � ,. ,� r: �: ; � • � � � �� : �r. �. ; � � ; � ., �. :� � �� , , , , .. � . � �-, ��. � ; ,, �; . :��.. �; ;�� _ � �� . �. � • �� :�_ r : � � .; � ; ,� ,. �� , , �; � � .�., ; �,� __ �, .. �� ; : � , : ;��, ; � �� :��: � � � � .�: � a � � . : ; �: �.. � :. �� ,_ � �� , :. . , ,� ; . . ' � ,, ; �� :r�r � , , i ; _ . � , � _� :�: ��9 �� cAS�c �ro. 458-96 �R�AS, the Mounds View Planning Commissian acting as the Board of Adjustment and Appeals has reviewed the reques� of Vic 8c Son Construction, filed on behalf of Tezx-y and Anne Jacobson, to;all �a reduction in the setbacic requirement from six feet to three feet between the principal building and an accessory garage fio allow construction of an enclosed rear entrance for the residence at 7090 Knollwood Drive; and, , `; ; .,; . . WHEREAS, the property is located in the R-1 single family residential district; and, WHEREAS, the applicant has presented a hardship statement to the Planning Commission stating a desire to continue use of the existing rear entrance without changing all the exterior landscaping and walks; and, WF�REAS, exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to this property given the Iacation of the existing residence, the existing accessory garage, and the location of the rear daor from the residence, which limit options for providing an enclosed rear enirancs whicn will provide weather protection. WHEREAS, the iiteral interpretation of the provisions of this Title would depr.ive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district in that the addition of a protected entrance is a common improvement for homes in the R-1 district. WHEREAS, the special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant in that the enclosed rear entrance is being added fio a residence where both the residence and garage e;cist, and the dimension between them is fixeci. The location of the rear door is also fixed, and is positioned such that the enctosure encroaches into the rec�uired setback. VJHEREAS, the grantingithe varianc� requested wil( noi confer on the applicant any special privilege that is derued by this Title to owners or other Iands, structures or buildings in the same district in that an enclosed entrance is a common improvement on single family hoznes. WHEREAS, the variance requested is the minimum variance which wo�Id alleviate the hardship in that the enc�osure is only as wide as a typical stairway wliich serves the rear entrance. i _ ;:� Planning Commission Resolution No. 4i9-96 October 2, 199b Page 2 �REAS, fhe variance would not be materiaIly detrimental to the purpose of this Title or to other peoperty in th�; same zone in that the enctosed entrance has no effect on adjacent properties. With comp�iance wi�h the contingency stated in this resolution, heaith and safety wiii be protected. WHEREAS, the proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantiaily increase the eongestion of the public streets or increase the dar�ger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantialty diminish or impair property values within the neigkborhood in that the location of the rear entrance and the garage is such that the two buildings do not overlap and the minimum dimensian of three feet is corner to corner. There is i feet 8 inches between the garage and the residence otherwise. The addition of the enclosed rear entrance witl not contribute to cong�stion on public streets. With compliance with the contingency stated in this resolution, safety from fire is addressed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Mounds View Planning Commission approves the variance request from Vic & Son Construetion, on behalf on Terry and Anne ;��, ; J'acobson, for a reduction in the setback requirement from six feet to three feet between the '' principal building and an accessory garage building at 7090 Knollwood Drive, subject to the � - - following contingency: _ _` ) 1. Prior io final inspection and approval of the building addition at 7090 Knoliwood Drive, The property owner sha�l comply with the requirements of Chapter 1000 of the Mounds View Municipal Code for fireproofing the wails of the garage, to the satisfaction of the City Building Official. Adopted this 2nd day of October, 1996. AT'TEST; (SEAL) i Jerry Peterson, Chairman Pamela Sheldon Community Development Director Item ��7 ,�:. �; : : � .� -, f; -, �; � �. : ` �; �._ N1e�#i�� I)ai�a Staii° itepo� byo Plan�xr�g Case Fi�e I�oe: Itequesto Fetetiortero Locataon: � P�d T�TO. �oning/I.,and IJse, Applicable Re�ulations: October 2, 199b Pamela Sheidon, Commur�ity Development Director 457-96 The applicant is requesting� a variance to e�end the current concceie driveway to 1 foot of fihe side property line. John R. Mar�ning 7755 Spring Lake �Zoad 06-30-23-33-00�� The property is currently zoned Ral Single Famity Residentiat Section 1004.OI, Subd 4., requires a 5 foot setback From any Iot line: This section of the Code sta�es that a temporary parking surfaces may l�e within 5 fee� (5') but not less than I foot (1'} from any lot line with permission from the adjacent property owner. � Section 1121.09, Subd. 7, defines temporary surfacing of off-street parking as brick or concrete pavers, graveI construciion or asphalt construction. It states that no cancre�e surfacing shall be aitowed for temporary surfaces. Section 1125,02 states the criteria for review of variances as follows: a. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to the properties which do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinity and result froin lot size or shape, topography oc other circumstances over which the owners of the property since the effective date hereof have had no control. b. c. d. The literal interpeetation of the provisions of Yhis Title would deprive the appiicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under ihe terms of this Title. That the special conditions or circumstances do not result from khe actions of the applicarit. That granting the variance requested wiii not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is dexued by this Title to o�vners or other iands, structures or buildings in the same district. Planning Case No. 459-96: 7755 Spring Lake Road Qctober 2, i 996 Page 2 e. That the varianc� requested is the rninimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. Economic conditions alone shail not be considered a hardship. f. The variance wouId noE be znaEeriaily detrimental to the purpose of this Title or to other property in the same zone. g. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properry or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the danger of iue or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. The Board of Adjustment and A�peals may impose such restrictions and conditions upon the peemises benefited by a variance as may be necessary to comply with the standards establisl�ed by this Title or to reduce or minimize the effect oi such variance apon other properties in the neighborhood and to better carry out the intent of the variance. At�achene�atso Planning Application Zoning Map Plot Plan Hardship Statement Resolution 482-96 �ackge°aured: The applicant is rec�uesting a variance to e�t#end his concrete driveway within 1 fQOt of the side property Iine. He lis�s several reasons why he feels a variance is appropriate in his hardship statement. The area hetween his existing driveway and the property line is too shaded to grow grass because of pine trees on his neighhor's progerty. The area is an eyesare and requires some kind of surfacing. His property fronts on Spring Lake Road where parking is prohibited. He wants to expand the existing driveway io provide parking for guests. Gu.est parking has been a grobiem and requires ferrying people from parking elsewhere in the neighborhood or from the park. The pine trees on the adjacent property provide a huffer. According to the pIot plan provided by the applicant, the neighbor's house is 80 feet from tke side property line. Staffrequested Mr. Manning to contact his neighbor as to whether they would give permission for a parking area within one foot of the property line. Mr. Manning was not able to get written permission. Therefore his request is two-fold: to reduce the setback from property lines ta parking areas regardless of whether the neighbor gives writt�n permission to allow the surf'acing to be concrete rather than temporary materiai ,�) PIanning Case No. 459-96: i755 Spring Lake Road October 2, I996 Page 3 l�nal�ses/ I�ecorn�endataono The str�ct application af the Zoning Code (Section 1121.09, Subd. 7) wouid only ailow the expaz�sion of a parking area on Mr. Maruzing's property to within one fooi oithe side property lir�e if : � . ihe surfacing were temporary (brick or concretie pavers, asphalt constnactior� or gravel consiruction), and his neighbor gives written permission Mr. Mannir�g desires to use cancrete since his existing driveway in fhe area which would be extended is also concrete. The portion of the driveway which crosses Spring Lake Road right-of way is asphalt (see ploi plan). V�ri��ce �r�terea {1125.02 Sub. 2) The applicant has provided a letter addressing each of the criteria for granting variances. Tn summary, the variance procedure is available to address situations where the normai application of the Zoning Code would deprive the applican� of rights commoniy enjoyed by other properties in the same district. Allowing 1VIr. Manning to expand his parking are� would add�ess the hardshig ereated by the parking resirictions on Spring Lake Road and the problems caused by the area along his side property line being shaded. This dif�iculty caused by parking restrictions is not unique to this property, however, Iblr. Manning has the ability to add 6 additional feei in width (ta five feet from the property line) using concrete without speciai permission from the City. He could add additional width on the north side of the driveway. The problems with his lawn could be addressed through a different type of iandscaping. Allowing parking areas within one foot was added to ihe ordinance when parking was restricted on Mounds View streets. Particular thought was given to limiting such parking areas to only temporary suriacing and with permission of the neighboring property. When parking areas are placed within one foot of a property line, there is very little ability ta provide bui%ring between the parking area and the n�ighbor. The requirement to obtain wrifiten permission from the neighboring property awner recognizes that parking areas that ciose may have an impact on the neighbor. Granting this variance would run counter to the very purpose for the Code requirement. �t�ff l�ecommes��ation: Approval of the attached resolution rl�nyan� a request for a concrete parking area within ane foot of a side praperty line at 7755 Sprin� Lake Road. cc: Jo�r� R, Manr�ar�g, 7755 Sprir�g Lake Road, Mounds Viewy ivlN 55112 I �� . � � � " � . .... ... ... . _ . .... �_ . � �' �� _ " _ _ _ ♦ � �� \ 0 ...* �� ._� -. _ � � • �. I .. � ._... � lnier�si in Pro�aet�fy (c:�ecit appr��ate bnx): � �wwner � ProQerty ` a Gar�tra� f�r Deed Owner � ❑ Lesse�, Operator, Manager � .4greemerrt qo Purc�rase Q Othet (expfain) . ❑�e�ey evid� of a�pli�rrYs ie9rar�st in �ira prooerty m�y k� r�quir€�d be�re 5e�i C tY �ae� af tfiis requesL �.�.: � a . � � _ � �1 � l�°ga# Des�.;ipti�n or �raperty ldentirTcaiiort Number � � _ .� U L� ! d n � .--5� _ r°� L°�a1 Owr�er: Nai�te/ d�r�s� %7� �= 5...�.. __ _ . ls -_�vr_ � nr�, ��C r1�� 1.� ♦ u oc� � � 3 _ 3 � -c� � 0 �4M5t�Ce40)7 P�es�nt Us� (cttec:c appropriate �ax); Q Undeve(�o�dNacarrt � Singte ramity Owelling ;� G Duplexliwo �amily Qwe�ting . . -- ----, . ,, __ .... .. .... .. . . ._. .. .._.. ,_ _.. ___ ._... .� MuiPa-�ami'ry (Na, of 1lniis � . - -- .�. . -- - (� �usines$ICamrnerc:al Est�Jisnrr�ent ❑ �ndustrial Fstabtisi�ment . � Othec (ex{alain) . Praperty Ciassmc.-�f�an: � Abs�ae: � ' Tarrens RE��UE�T': �a��3Se nOle; L' IJ' r r'din ��5 e'!/ �R Si4 �� d �� . may be re,seQnsiole ior acaitianai fees associated ��+i� the r�rrew i HE:�E3Y �ErL4F'iE i°HAi T�!E ,�BOVE S i a�; c.�i1E� i ARE TFU�. F�mni , SZC�/acrg. minimum SZ�O. ;na�am� S7.Q�0 _ �'� �-1 � r�-2 - �°b. �ii athers S2{k7 Wt7tl[toPtBi USe P�njt A-S � I�-z -�`°i 5. 9i1 Ot��r3 S'°c00 Co�� ,app�l 5i 5 �eveeoo.rSit� �fan f�roi�r St40/acr�. rrinimr;srt i�0.:na�muara �i.9 lAinar Sunaivisaon �i � �48�r Su�iivisian �m� pic� S6m0 ae�osrt C:.rrta. ?!an Amendrrr�tqY 54�� 'Nerlana .�Yer�or4 r's�� 550 niu� �eor�re ce�rrnrnea :y a"tffiP 'Nedand �urfes r �mri� Sj � F�lannang S;gn �Q ��JTJ S.iVA r��Jti �dmendrrterm S7� o� y P sT °�1C� ��,n�ng c.� ,v�. � 5 4 � � �� or this reques` �� _ :� ?srie t�»and O��iare � Deffi r 9ad �aaot Alurrsb�r iata! Fee� p� O�e ?ei� Recaiot Numb�r Additianai �se r �fd 75��'' � ``? � �i L: 5� R Oae� r�� F�cedat Numo�r � DarB �r Sn�k �°.;c� APP9GVE� � �ENiE� ti %;b1�7 ;� _.._._ , _ _ .. �.�. =_; ,^-. �'� r_._-T„ _' �g39 � °' \ ,-a..w-�.e-"" ' � M N M P= _ � \\` . � � �� . 6191 � N � ,� J � f � \ �, �. � � � i e . N �., � � � � � � • � �°� e 1 ♦ \ °y � �j � � \� � �1 �� f � � 41 f1 W f �i. � i o ' � � � fl � i: i� �: f+ �� i�, �� !: !� E• I� ., BF QS � IV � fV � N � N� N � ftit { N 1 PP � N (^� N Vicinity Mape 459-96 7755'Sprin.g Lake Road Ap�lieanfi: .Tnh„ u u.,.,�.;�,. nui� sa�s j Ha�s j aott ) I 7sa� 796s � ` �_ 7965 ! 7959 I 7945 � 6 i9J5 � - �� rI� N � M !N � �. -;� � � � i : ,:, �: � .-°. � � � .�: : � � ., �, September 4, 1996 � Ci�y of Moundsview Re: 7755 Spring Lake Road Zoning Code Varience Request The code that limits concrete paving to within 5 feet of a prop2rty line seems to be resiric�ive for these unusual circumstances: 1. A line of 5Q Pine tr2es. on the rear of the adjacent property is an on going �roblem. This long line of trees dwarf the property Iine, and hang over a fence, shading the entire South side of 7755 Spring Lake Road. Maintainance on this side is. never ending due to the long needles �hey produce and the weeds that they encourage, Grass has been planted in this area numerous times but fails to grow because af the pine needles ar�d continual shade. The area has been taken over by unmaintained weed growth on the neighboring side along ihe fence. 2. The code seems more applicable to properiies adjacent (side-by-side} � each other rather than where a side property line meets a rear property line, , � 3. The Pine �rees along ihe property line have reached a matur2 state with an average heighi of 20 to 30 fee� �all. The trees have ; been causing the above listed prablems for many years, • 4. The boulivard. in front o# 7755 Spring Lake Raad has been designa�ed as a�Io Parking Zone and has been a continual parking problem when ouests visit. Having 2 addztional parking sp�ces an the driveway at i755 Spring Lake Rcad will make it convenient and safe for guest vehicles. 5. An off set of 1 foot from the proper�y line would make this �ro j2et prac �icle and also clean up the property which has been an eyesore for many years. 6. This additional parking area has be�n suggested �y other home owners Iiving along the nartion oi Snring Lake Road where the l�Io Par?�ing Zone has been Cesignated. 7. Concrete pavement, to match the exsisting driveway, wili only improve ihe property along this line and will relieve an ongoing pari�ing problem. Sincerly, , John l�lIanning �- r- � � � - ;r _ ; � �. � _ � �� ; �� -. - : �� ,�� . ; �. :r�� i �� i, :�- , ;�; � �� .r�- �� •��. `' ` `° �� `� F !�' < ' ` :� �� '� � '` ' �� i., , . s :� t � <f � . � � i ��, ; :� : � ��.. f`1.� `, •. �, � . : � � . `1�'�� ''' � •�. !�: . � i , � :�. , -:: � � ,. VVT-iEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission acting as the Board oiAdjustment and Appeals has reviewed the requesi of 7ohn R. Ivlanning to buiId a concrete parking area wiikun ane �oot of a side property line where five feet is required an property located at 7755 Spring Lake Road; and, WHEREf1S, the property is tocated in the R-1 single fanniIy residential district; and, WHEREAS, the applicant has presented a hardship statement to fihe Planning Commission citing the difi'iculties caused by ihe parking restrictians on Spring Lake Road, the need for more guest parking, and the pcoblems keeping a lawn growing in the area proposed for the parking area 6ecause it is shaded by pine trees on the adjacent property owner's lot; and, ) WHEREAS, the allowance for parking areas within one foot of a property line was added to the Zoning Code wizen the City imposed parking restrictions on ali City stree�s; and, �-�EREA�, considerable thought was given to the conditions under r�vhich such parking areas wouid be a�proved; and, �VHEREAS, the Zoning Code specifically states that these parking areas are to be constructed using temporary materials vvhich are defined as brick or concrete pavers, gravel construction or asphalt construction, and fihat no concrete surfacing is to be used; and, WHEREAS, the Zoning Code specifically states that a property owner proposing a parking area within one foot of a property line shall obtain the pezmission of the adjacenfi property awner; and, WF�REAS, th� applicant is proposin� a concrete parking area ar�d has been �anable to g�t permission ofthe adjacent property owner; and, �, Planning Commission Resolueion 4�2-96 ` } October 2, 1996 Page 2 �1JHEREAS, this variance requesi iails to meet the following criteria for granting a variance as stated in Section 1125.02 oithe Zoning Code. There are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances which apply io this property wtvich do not apply generally io other properties in the vicinity in that all of the praperties fronting on Spring Lake Road in this area have the same parking restrictions; and, 2. The granting of the variance would confer on th.e applicant a sgecial privilege in that he would be allowed to build a parking are� within one fao� of the side property line without the conseni o�the neighboring property owner. The requirement for permission was included when the al(owance for such parking areas was added io the Zoning Cod�, and is a key provision wl�ich recognizes the possible impact on neighboring proper�ies and protects the public welfare. Other aiternatives are available to the applicant for provid�ng additional guest parking on his property without needing a variance. There are 11 feet 6 inches between the e�sting driveway and the side Iot iine, aliowing far six feet of parking area to be add�d to ihe driveway witkun ihe required five foot setback. The applzcant couid also add to the north side of the driveway. The variance requested is nat the minimum needed. 4. The variance r�vill be materialty detrimental to the purpose of the Zoning Code and to other property in the same zone in that the Code provisions specifically and intentionally requires permission from the adjacent property owner, and such permission has not been given. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, �hat the I�Iounds View Planning Commission does hereby deny the variance request for a concrete parking area wzthin one foot of a side property Iine at 7755 Spring Lake Road. ' Adopied this 2nd day of October, 1996. ATTEST (SEAL) Jetry Peterson, Chairman Pamela Sheldon, Community Development Director � - :i �Y , � n _ `� � �� ;� 'I'oc Mounds `Iiew Planning Cammission Froa�: Pamela Sheldon, Communiiy Development Director ��a�,�ecto Setbacks for Parking Lots for Non-R�sidential Uses Planning Case No. 5P-008-9b Da�eo Issue October l, I996 Meeting on October 2, 1996 Ttem ��S Mr. Danny D. Moon, a property owner in Mounds View, has requested the Zoning Code be arrtend�d to require a minimum 15 foot setback between parking lots a.r�d property lines, when th� parking lots are for churches or any commercia,l uses, when these uses abut residential �ses. At your last meeting, the Planning Cammission reviewed a proposed ordinance on this issue. Th� proposed ordinance also included a minimum lot size requirerr�ent for churches and commerciai uses, and a number of clean-up items. The City Attorney has advised that it is best ta praceed as if the 60-day n,ile applies to this requesi. Staffhas notified Mr. Moon that the City is extending th� time period for review of his request for an additional6� days, or a tofial of 120 days from the date oF submittal. The Plannin� Commission needs to act on Mr. Moon's request by October 9 i� arder for staffto have enough time to place this reques� before City Council for action. At your last meeting, the Plannirag Commission requested an ordinance be drafted which addressed Mr. Moon's specific request and the additional of a minimum lot size requirement for churches and corrunercial uses. Discussion StafF has prepared two ordinances for the Planning Commission's review. Draft #4 is a barebon�s proposal which adds Mr. Moon's request to our existing Cocle, and a one acre mirumum lot size for churches and any commercial uses in the R-1, R-2, R-3 and R-4 districts. Draft #4 includes no cleanup items, and more or tess relies on the way the existing Code is organized. Stafffeels ihat there are some problems with this approach and would urge the Planning Commission to consider Draft #3. Mounds V�ew Planning Commission Page 2 October 1, 199b Draft #3 inciudes Mr. Moon's request, and also includes some reorganization of Code provisions a.nd some clean up items which sfiaff feels are important to our administration of the Code. Given the shori time frame available to the Planning Commission for review oithes� two ordinances, staffis prepared to go over them in detail at your meeting on Octaber 2. cc: Dan Moon, b9291'leasant �Iiew Drive,lVlounds �Iiew MN 551 I2 By FAX: 783-1853 ; ;� , _ , � � ;� ,,�' •, °,, , � , � : .��':� � �� .. 4'. . , :�i .' : �; '. � .1'. \ ��. . ��.: �'�.. ; � .�; ; �:_ ,�� .�., ! �: ''., " .... �. �, �i � . .� � ,..` . ...; - �, . - �;. / �_ :� � �-: ` � � '` , �' "' " � �`, : ' ; � .'', '� �' i .`_ f� ' _ ; _ "f' t �, .. . �� ,. E�� !1 :1 _ ,� '` ' C ; � t� 1 `i'�, - ' I � �1"� � �� _ '" � . � '' � ,i � . �. � ... ��. , ; 1: ,. .�. �� "�� !' ': �° �� . � i`�� ' �� 11 . � ;� ., : !1 .. ., . � ■ � , �� ; :1' �: 1 � ; : �� `� ,: � � :� ;-� ' , , ��I , '` • ' 1 , . � _1, �; .�.1:_ �� "'.� ��, ; �- ;11 . ' `� �. �� `� k . f� '��. .. ; � � ;I,. : , 11 ' "�� ,� :_ 1 ... : „ . , �; � � � E � . � ; �� i� _ �� '1 1 !i�' 1', t•< 1" '{�.1.,. '.i'. ;1% 1": TI�E CIT'Y OF �iOUNDS �W ORDAINS: Section lo Section 1104.01 Subd. 3. Is hereby amended to read as follows: �ubd_ 3. Setbacks: The setbacic distances listed in the table belovv ap,plv to principal and accessor,� buildings, except as oiherwise provided for accessary buildin�s and condifiiona[ uses in specific zonin,� districts. All setback distances shown, ��iste� , shall be measured from the appropriate lot Iine. The Iettered . faotnotes correspond to Seciion 1104.01 Subd. 3. a., b., c.. and d. Setbacks for paricing areas and loading docks shall be as noted in I 104.01 Subd, d. and in Sections 1121.09. Subd. 11 and 1121.11. Subd. 3. Front Yard Side Yard Rear Yard District` Minimum Minimum When Abuts Minimum When Abuts Residential Resident�al R-1 30 a. 10 b. 30 R-2 30 a. 10 b. 30 R-3 30 10 c. 20 c. 30 40 R-4 30 20 c. 20 c. '' 30 50 R_5 -- As required under Chapter 1110.05 of this Title -- R-O 30 20 c. 20 c. 30 50 B-1 30 d. I O c. 20 c. 20 30 B-2 3� d. 10 c. 20 c. 20 30 B-3 30 d. 10 c. 20 c. 20 40 B-4 30 d. 10 c. 30 30 40 I-1 40 d, 20 c, 4Q 40 40 1Lettered footnotes in this tabte correspond to Seccion 1104.01 Subd. 3. A., b., c., and d. 4rdinance No. 590 Draft #4 Page 2 pUD __ A� required under Chapter 112� of this Title -- a. Where ad�aceni structures within the same bIock have front yard set6acks difFerent from those required, the front yard setback shall be within the range of the setbacks of the adjacent structures. If there is only one adjacent structure, ihe front yard setback shall be within the range af the cequired setback of thirty feet {30') and the setback of the adjacent structure. In no case shalt the front yard be less than thirty feet (30'}. � c. � Nat less than thirty feet (30') from the lot line if iot is on corner, and on interior lines, a ftve foot (5') setback on the garage side for the garage struc�ure is allowed. IVot Iess than thirty feet (30') from lot line if lat is on corner. �lehicle parking or loading docks shall not be located within the minimum required sethack. Sectian 2. Section 1106.04 Subd I_ are hereby amended to read as follows: Subd. 1, Pubtic or semi-public recreational buildir�gs and neighborhood or communiiy centers, public and private educational ins�itutions lirruted to elementary, junior high and seruor high schools and religious institufions, such as churches, chapels, temples and synagogues; provided, thai: a. 0 c. Front yard depths shall he a mir�imum of thirty five feet (35'). Side yards shall be no Iess than thirty feet (30'). Minimum iot area shall be one 1 acre. c-d. Adequate off-street parking and access is provided on the site ar on lots directly abutting or direcily across a public street to the principal use in compliance with Chapter 1121 of this Titie and that such parking is adequateiy screened and landscaped from surrounding and abutting residential uses in compliance with Section 1103.08 of this Title. t�e. �f Adequate off-stree� loading and service entrances are provided and regulated where applicabte by Chapter I i22 of this Titie. The provisions ofsu�rdivisi�n Section 1125.01(-i-� Subd. l.e. ofthis Title are considered and satisfactorily met. �ecti�� 3. Sectian 1107.05 Subd. 2. is hereby amended �o read as foiiows: Subd. 2. Day care, group nursery; provided, that: a. L� No overnighi facilities are provided for the children served. Children are delivered and removed daaly. The front yard depth shall be a minimum of thirty feet (30'). �) - - 'l - , Ordinance No. 590 Dra.ft #4 Page 3 c. IVfin�mu�n lot area shall be one (11 acre. �d. No less than forty (40) square feet of outside play space per chiId shall be provid�d and that such space be suitably fenced and/or screened in accordance with conditions as may be specified by the City Council. � �:f. Adequate o#� street parking and access is provided in compliance with Chapter 1121 of'this Titie. �ldequate off-street loading and service entrances are pravided in. compliance with Chapter 1122 of this 7Citfe. f.g. The site and related parking and service entrances shall be served by an arterial or collector street of sufi°icient capacity to accommodate ihe traffic which will be generated. �h. ir, i. All signing and informationai or visual communication devices shall6� in compliance with the Mounds View Sign Code. The provisions of subdivision 1125.01(1)e of this Title are considered and satisfactorily met. Section 40 �ection 1109.04. Subd. 2, and Subd. 3. is hereby amended to read as foJlows: Subd. 2. IVursing homes and similar group housing but not including hospitals, sanitariums or similar institutions; provided, that: a. b. �-c. �-d. e�e. �% rg. �h. Side yards double the mirumum requirements established for ttus District and are screened in campliance with Section 1003.08 of'this Title. Minimum lot area shall be one ,l) acre. Only the rear yard shalI �be used foc ptay ar recreational area. Said area shall be fenced and controlied and screened in compliance with Section 10�3.08 of fhis Title. The site shail be served by an arteriai or coll�ctor street of sufficient capacity to accommodaie traffic which will be generated. All signing and informational or visuai communication devices shall be in comgliance with the Mounds View Sign Code. AlI State laws and statutes goveming such use are strictly adhered io, and all required operating gernuis are secured. One off-street loading space in compliance with Cnapter 1122 of this Title is provided. The provisions of subdivision 1125.01(I)� of this Titte are considered and satisfactorily met. Ordinance N�o. 590 Draft #4 Page 4 Subd. 3. Pa,rking faciIiiies for ad}acent commercial or muliipie dwelling establishm�nts; provided that: a. � �c. Such parking is in excess ofr thai required on the lot upon which the principal use is located. eommon ro ert line shall com 1 wi�h the rovisions stated in Section 1121,11 Subd. 3. Applicable condiiions of Chapter 1121 of tlus Title are satisfactorily me� and fuily compIied with. � �d. Wl�en parking is the p�ncipal use, adequate screening from abutting residential uses and landscaping is provided in compliance with subdivision 1103.08(6) of this Title. d-e. The site of the pzincipai use and its relatied parking is served by an arterial or collector streei of sufficient �apacity to accommodate the traf�ic which will be generaied. �-f. The provisions of subdivision 1125.01(1}e of this Title are considered and satisfactoriiy met. Section So Section 1121.09 Subd. 11 is hereby amended to read as follows: Subd 11. Curbing and Landscaping: Except for single-famiiy, two-family and townhouses, ail open off-street parking shall have a perimeter curb barrier araund the entire parking lot; said eurb barrier shall not be closer than five feet (5') fo any lot line, exce t as rovided in Section 1104.01 Subd. 3.d. and 1121.11 Subd. 3. Grass, plantings ar surfacing materiais shall be provided in ail areas bordering the parking area. Section 5. 5ection 1121.1 I Subd. 3 is hereby amended to read as follows: Subd. 3. Accessory off-'street a. � shall be not less ihan five feet (S') from any lot line, 104.01 Subd. 3.d. and where narkin� lntc whic-h _) 'i 1 Ordinance No. 590 Draft #4 Page 5 3ectaon 5. Sectioz� 1123.02 Subd. 1 is hereby arnended to read a,s faliows: Subd. 1. Continuance of �Jse: �a,� Genez-al: Any structure or use lawfially existing prior to a � structure or use nonconformin� shall not be enlarged 6ut may be continued at the size and in the manner of operation existing upon such date, except as hereinafter specified or subsequently amended. Read by the City Council of ihe City of Mounds View this day of , 1996. Read and passed by the Ciiy Cauncii of the City of Mounds View this day oF , 1996. ATTEST: A.PPROVED AS TO FORIvi: Robert Long, City Attorney Jerry Linke, Mayor Chuck Whiting, City Cterk-Administrator � '� -;:;; _� �' "1 ;1�� • '.'i� . � �� 1� ;t ; . _�- '., �: ; 1, 1 '., �� t:: • � ' !. �'i1 ; �.�.;:,, `. �!� " :1� 1 : :. �.. ;.� . � , < f : ; . �, ' ; ;; : ; ; � . '�, . . . F . : ; ; .1 : �::' �� , . .� . �1' •. � �_ '. i •`. -� � • "'. :� ` s!: �1� �1`` �� ; ��: -:, ; f� �� ; ; �, :., ., � :, f ., ��_ � � �• : � �:� � �, � . �; . � . ; � .� ��: : � _ ��, . .. �:E� _ �, � � . � . � . ,�� t : � � � ,; � �. �, ,, . � � ; �.: �� r= �� ►, � ;�� ;�� :, � � i •� � . �� _ �� ; ,�. , , . : . :�: ., , ,�.. , , . i r: �;. � i� �. i,, i ��.► i� r•,. E�. �. � THE CITY OF MO�S `VI�� ORDAINS: S�ctior� 1. Section 1102.OI is hereby amended to add a new Subd. �8. "Principat Building" as stated below, and the subsequent subdivisions in ihis section are to be renumbered accordingly. Subd. 88. Principal Building: The main or primary building containin�, the principal use oi a oroperty as distin�uished from an accessory buildin�. Section 2o Section 1104.01 SUbd. 3. Is hereby amended to read as follows: Subd. 3, Setbacks for Principai Buildin�s: The setback distances listed in the table below applv to principal buildin�s, except as otherwise provided for conditional �ses in specific zonin� districts. AII setback distances shown, , sha11 he measured from the appropriate lot line. The le�tered footnotes corres�ond to Section 1104.01 Suhd. 3. a.: b., c., and d. Front Yard Side Yard Rear Yard District' Minunum Minimum When Abuts Minimum When AbuEs Residential Residential R-1 30 a. 10 b. � 30 R-2 30 a. 1 d. b. 30 R-3 30 10 c. 20 c. 30 • 40 R-4 30 24 c. 20 c. 30 50 R-5 -- As req_uired under Chapter i 110.05 af this Title -- R-O 30 20 c. 20 c. 30 Sd B-1 30 �- 10 c. 20 c. 2fl 30 B-2 30 c� 10 c. 20 c. 20 30 1Lettered footnotes in cf�is table correspond to Section 1104.01 Subd. 3. A., b., c., and d. 4rdlna.rnce No. 590 Uraft #3 P�ge 2 B-3 B-4 r- t PUD ,: S. . ::s � . 0 30 c� 30 �- ao �: �Ihere �} �i��.�; �� ]0 c. ia �. Zo C. front yard seiback ; r the mini 'v � .. 4 �— fr ` � ., �,,,. �...:� y .;y: 20 c. 2� 40 30 30 40 40 40 40 required under Chapter t 120 of this Title -- rincipal buildings on lots w�ithin the same block on the front yard setbacks_ different from those required, the :.R�itit�Kirnr��•,tir . In no case shall the front yard be less than thirty fee� (30'). For �urposes of this subsection a biock shali be def ned as that grou� of lots l��alon� a sireet between the twc closest streeis which intersect at a�proximately right an�;les to this street, eace�t that where the len h of the street fronta e between the two intersectin streets � �reater than fourteen hundred (1400�feet the biock shail be the lots within six hundred and fift 6S0 feet on either side of the lot in uestion. Not less than thirty feei (30'} from fi�e lot line i� lot is on corner. �v�mrteriar '1'he s�de setback may be reduced to five feet (5') between an interior side dot ]ine -. �� l t� ' and that side_of a rp incipal buiIdin�which is constructed as a�ara�e ./J}� ��` c. ' Not less than `tlzirty feet'(30') irom tot line if lo# `is on`'corner. ` . � �-�ni-r�imt�m�ir� Section 3. Section 1104.OI Subd. 4. Is hereby amended to read as follows: � . - - - ,- - - . � Subd. 4. Setbacks for Accesso Buildin s Dzivewa s and Parkin Areas a. Accessort� Buildin�s (detached from a princit�a( bcaildin�• � R-I�,R-2, R�3. R-4. R-5 and R-O: �1��'�t'��ti`�'� � front: no accessorv buildin� shall be located_between the froni �e 1 � side: five feei (5') except the minimum setback shall be 30' from an� 1ot line abutting a pub(ic street '-, ,,1 Ordinance No. 590 Draft #3 Page 3 � � rear: five feei (5') �2 All other districts: same as principaI building c. Parkin� , � � „< a � �,�r' ;-, j', t . _ � R-1. R�2. Rm3, R�4. R-5. R-O: � residentiat uses: � non-residential uses pro.perty line shai! be as follows; u � � t � � �. . �, • �e:' .. _ ..: p �.-c: G�, � ,a r?:`� ..;��t:,,:'': t� �ertv in a for sites having,two and one-half (2.5 ) acres or tess: twenty �eet �20'� for sites having more than two and one-ha3f (2.5, aeres: ihirty feet (30'� Parkin� areas in existenc�e as , and which do not conform to the provisions of this subsectian, mav continue subiect to the provisions of Section 1123.02 Subd. 1(b). �2 B-1 B-2, B-3 B�4 (�parkin�_areas and loading docks� � �TOilf. 3 � f80t ` � �} � � � _ .. ' � �b,� side and rear: 5 feet, exce�,t where a non-residential use abuts a ,,_r_.� -_ property in a residentiai district, i�e seiback for parking areas from the common property line shall be as stated in Section 1 I04.04 Subd. 4.c.l.b. Ordinance No. 590 Draft #3 Page 4 �; �, Ordinance IVo. 590 Draft #3 Page 5 - � I-1 (parkin� areas and load�ng docks� .., �,. �a front: 40 feet < ��`> � � _ . ti- � z:��_ ��, <�� side and rear: 5 feei; excepi where a non-residential use abuts a w_ .� ---pr�erty in a residentiai district, the setbaek for parking areas from �� > ��'°;'�� `i�'� ��--. the common �ropertv Iine shail be as stated in Section 1104.04 Subd, 4.c.l.b. Seeiion 4o Section 1104.02 Subd. 2. is hereby amended to read as foliows: Subd. 2. Lot � Dimens�ons: Lot �'rrm�nsi-orts width and area shall noi be less than the following: a. Widtl� (1} R-1 interior tot 75 feei (2) R-1 corner iot, R�2, R93, R-4, R-O 100 f�et b. '�-�t Minimum Lot Area (1) Compuiations for lot area shail not include land beyond a depth of _ one hundred fifty feet (150') on lots having less than one hundred , J;. foot (1fl0') frontage. . , ;, r ,x � 1 :�x � <::�c, rS,. .1"_� ,, _. �, :' (2) �f Lats greaterthan o�e hundred foot (100') frontage may use depihs '' ,. not exceedin one and one-half 1 1/2 iimes the fronta e in ��. -f'� computing lo area. ( - } g ,__�.F- (3) Minimum iot si�c area requirement shall be as stated in the table below. The lot area per dweliin� unit requirements for townhouses, condominiums,�lanned unit developments and multiple family developments shail be calcuiated on the basis of the totai area in the project and as contralIed by an individual and/or joint ownershi� Ordinance No. 590 Draf$ #3 Page 6 DistrictlT e of Lot� Minimwn Lot Size Minimum Lot Area Ln_squar� feet) Per DwellicTg Unit f3) (in square feet� R-1 Intecior 11,000 i 1,000 {no more than one unit per lot re�ardless of lot size) R-1 Corner Lot %2,500 12.500 (no more than one unit per lot regardless of lot size) + Rml, R-2, R-3, R-�, R-5 43,560 (1 acre) Non-residential uses listed as conditional usess except for o�rnmental and public utiiitv buildings and . structures necessaiv for the health, safetv and general welfare oi the community - � , R-2, R-3 -I2,500 for toi develoned with sirtgIe- !12,500 � ,_ ` Duplexes, Townhouses famiiv detached dweilin�; �- .;._ - 12 500 for each half of divided lot deveioped with hvo-family dwelling;, - 2�,000 for undivided Iot developed with two-family dweili�_ R-4 sin�le family detached: 11,000 Townhouses, Condominiums, two-famiIv: 6,250 Planned Unit Developments, townhouse: 6,500 Multipie Familv (4) multiple famiiv: 2,500 I_l 43,560 {I acre) B-1, B-2, 8�3, B-4 no tninimum: must allow for setbacks and parkin� requiremenis to be met ��R�tir.�[�:�uyta\•.la�fFll��fill�� u��ir.�r�,�siiriaf��v.i.�rrr�►�r�n� k�tyi��i� nnr.w�K�)I I�l�l Il�l��/]� tt�fff��\%(�t�Y 1r 1 f[��r��t�Nt��•.��t:� [:»r�iw� �J � Numbered foatnotes in this table correspond to Section I 104.02 Subd. 2.b.(3) and (4). - `'j Qrc;;na.r�ce No. 590 Draft #3 Page 7 . , -- * �� .._ � . Z . . , 1 . •.-. � .. . i " ' .� .. � ...�... ., �� f ` � � . .,. . _�.,., _ {�j�4 ITsable Open Space: Each multiple-iamily dweiiing siie shall contair� at ieasi six hundred twenty five {62S) square feet of usable open space as defined by subdivision 1102.02(109} of this Code for each dwelling unit contained iherein. Section 50 5ection 1121.09 Subd. i 1 is hereby amended to read as foliows: Suba. 1 I. Curbing a�d Landscap�ng: Except for single-family, two-family and townhouses (in develo�ments of six units or less), ail open o#'F street parking sha11 hav� a perimeter curb barrier around the entire parking lot_ , . The iocation of this eurb barrier shali complv with the setback requirements %r parking areas sfated in 5ection 1104.01 Subd. 4. Grass, pEantings or surfacing materiais shall be provided in all areas borderin� the parking area. Seci�an 6o Sectifln 1121.11 Subd. 3 is hereby amended to read as foilows: Subd. 3. Accessory off-street parking . shall comt�lv with the required minimum setbacks as stated in Section I 104.01 Subd. 4. ' Seciior� 7e Section I 123.02 Subd. 1 is hereby amended to read as fotlows: Subd. 1. Continuance of Use: � General: Any structure or use lawfiFIly e�sting prior to a zortnrg-r�s�-charsge revision to this Code or a chan�e in a zonin� district designation which makes the structure or use nonconformin� shall not he enlarged 6ut may be continued at th� size and in the manner of operation existing upon such date, except as hereinafter specified or subsequentiy amended. � Parkin� Areas for Non-Residential Uses, Ailowed by Conditional Use Permit, in the R-i, R-2, R-3, R-4 and R-5 Districts: Parlcin�areas in existence as of J . , : ,� � ;, t � � � .. 4 .. � .. � � }` l.! , '�I. � ; 4, '' t 1 V , � � y .::t.' '��k' �-"� �-: Ordinance No. 590 Draft #3 Page 8 Read by the City Council of the City of Mounds View fhis day of , 1996. Read and passed by the City Council of the City of Mounds View this day of , 1996. AT'TEST: Chuck Whiting, City Clerk-Administrator .APPROVED AS T'O FORM: Robert Long, City Atforney 7erry Linke, I+�Iayor C f r,, r. .; —% ' ' a. — ... a ; � � � _. :--- _ __� ... . ,. , - _ _ ... ..:. .. . .. . . . .. � .. - - _.. _ ._ . _ ..._ __.... . _ _�-- -_._ ..._ �:_. ._ _.�.. ._ _. _ ._ . _ _ _ �. - - . , ._ . . . . _ . _ - _ _ __.- _ .. _ � . - -�a. -r. _ .-.r� _ - ... .� .� . ' .. - ' ,5.��. r� �`- - .., .. _ .. ._ .._ ._. .. .. -. ,.- - '-- ..: - - . _: . i . .. _� . .�_..� . __ .._, �_.�_: - 'r_... -. ., :_ :._ _ .. _ . . .: _ _ .�... _ " ' .- . . �.. _.:.: .. . . . .. _....'._.-. _- ... ._. . _ _ '� " _ ' _.. -_ . .. .... ....._. ... . - .� � ..._.. �.--.....z-..,.._.. _ ""' _'"". _ .. . .� . . . . . . . �- : " ' . .. . .. _� .-. _.-..._�,-� __ . . �. :. - . - — �. - -,- - ": ' � . �- . � . .x. £-',_ �. . . . � � � . . .. __ __. _. ' .. . -- ' - ' . - . .. .. , �. .- -. , ... . . . . � . . .. . . _ _ . ... ._:._:, MOUI�US VIE��I PL.�NNII�TG COM�IISSION ,:,`_. . ._ : -- _ ' . . - - - ;. ._:: . :_ OCTOBEI� 9, 1996 i . . _...: . �= _ ._. - . , _ � _ .. : , - 7:00 P.l�i. . _ _ r .._... -- --_ . :. ... .. �: AGET�DA�S�SSIOI�i .:.� � . .. ;,; _. . ... . :. . - - ,_ : _ � . _ ._. �. . . _ __ --_ . :..�- .. = _ .. , _ . .. - _.�: - , . . .._. .... :, _ . _. .<.. _ : _ . . - - . __- - � � ,, . ..,. ., � - _; .: _ . : . �. _... _. : _ .. _. _ _. _;, . Citiz�s Requests and Commex�ts oa Ite�s Not on tlxe Agenda _ - - _m_a______________9 _ . :.. _ _ _ -_ _ _ . .. - CI`TIZENS: BEFORE SPEAi;.II�tG, PL£�E COME TO THE PODN�/I, �,ND CiNE _ -.� _.: .:_.. YOUR FULL NAME AND ADDRESS FOR ii� MINUiES - . ..'. . _ .. . . . _---. _--.. . _.__._.. .. _._. ._.. . .. --- ..: _ .... __ . . . .. .. _ .. __.._ Pr.. C CO�S��I�Io C�11 i� Order . . .. ._ . :. .... , . . . . Items fo�- Decisio�a ; . . :. . - . .- _ ,_ .. . _-. _ - - .._ _ .. . . . . ._ . .. . _ . _::. . e ._ " - -:-�. - .. , - - .. .. .,.._ ._ .. _ . _ _ .... .. . . . _._ ... . . - --- -- • -- _..-- -- - - ..... . __ :: _. - . Z. � Call to Order _ _ _.__ .... . . ........ 1 4. Roll Call Planning Case No. SP-Q08-96 . - _ - . : Revision of parlarig ioi setbacks betweeen residential and �on-residezttia! uses � Revision of Iot area requirements for conditional uses in reside�tiai districts_ .� z'��`'`W'�`�"� �---- __._.-- --------. Applicant: Danny D.1VIoon/Cily of Mounds jliew � . - �.� ��°' � 6 �� - ::..::... : . . .. 5'taffReconamendation: Approve _- _. _ :._ ,; :. :_.: ._ ,� ::." : _ - - - P�, � co ssaor�: �aJo�� E��. s�ssio�t ! _ - ._ . . _ . .. . . __ - .. _: -�� _ _ = Iteaa�� for Dyscussaon .. : ... - .. .. :., .., .. ::; . : Pianning Case No. 4b0-96 _ . - _ ��-�-.�,;�.-` <:��-,.:� � :�,�: �._ - _ �. 29'15 Highway IO �`-`..' `�"`..°�- Applicant; Ron Ostr°ander �nd Bnace MacDonaId � � -� �'v-� � � �: r�,. � r�.��& . cA_.,.:. �.,�. , Request foc approval of a conditionai use permit to a31ow minor antomobile regair. 6. Planning Cas� No. 461-96, 4b2-96, and 463-96 ck <-y�,,--��,_<.�. r-�, t=�- ��-�-� ��,--t-� � 2535-2585 Highway 10 s c�t..��-��,�.,,�� -�r.:�...i,�.-�-�e.'i Applic�t: Paster Enierprise$ (dba: Maunds View Assoc. LLP) ��--�? �- . Request for approval of a canditional use permit to allow joixzi use of parkicig facilities, and approval (�..�� %r variances in sign height and si� ar�a for the shopping center id�ntificaeion sign, an� in garking �� ratios_ � �'�. e "�.� �� $��*�� A.PPLICANTS: YOUR ATT�NNDANC� AT THIS IVIEETII�G IS ItEQUESTED. PLEASE NOiiFi'' CIi°Y HALi. AT 784�3055 I� YOU ARE UNABLE TO ATiE"�7. iHAAtIC YOU. ��*��#�� Ag�da Coatinued , ,.. ; ` ` . . : . . - -- . _ _ . - - --- . ,. . . . . . _ _... . � .. . .. . . _ - � '- . Y .- ' _ . . "' - ' , _ . _ _ . . . � ._ : r . �-' _. _ �- . ........_�...� -_ " ......_. .._�__., , - . _ . .. . .-._ . _.� _ � � �_ .__ . . ._ ...� . . . _._' _ �. ._ _ . .... . � _ .. . - . Planniag Co�naaission Agenda _ .: - . _ _ . : _ . � :.. . _ _. . _ _ _.. __.. - . ,.-,.: _. _.. _ . .. _. - - - . . .... ..:_ . _.. . _. . .. ._:_. ... .... _.. _..._� . ., _,_ ; . . cto �r , 996 :._. � .- : -._ . _.... _ _. . . Page 2 " .. - . . � . . . .. _ - __ _ .. _ ; , . .... - ....�_._. ... .. _..._. _ - , _ ,._. ,- �.. _... . _ -- - .. _. .. . _ _. . _. . -- —_ ., --- _ _ �- - _: 7. - .:�:. Planrai�g Cas� No. 464�96 . , _ . . _ : . . . . ' .. .� � -m�c � _.. ". _ ._. _.. . ,, - - - _ :. :; 2375-2395 �Iighway IO �_. : - - � � . . . _ .. . _ : _.. . _ _ , - APPlicant: Satum I?eveIopmerit - - - - ,...._.._ __: . : . . . _ . . -. . �. : : I�equest i"or approvat �i aix amended coaditional use permi� to ailow �pansion of an existing auto -- . -.. ..... - :: ---dealerslup, the addibio�x of a cag wash and �xxpaasion of available repair services. �� -. --- ' . _ ,. . _ . - - - � . . . � �-• � -= Plat�iBg Case No. SP-001-96 . _ -�rt-.�v�_r� - -�.�.:srt.��: � � � . � � � --__ _._ _ . - _.- . . _ I?iscussion of Co�mercial Wireless Tclecommtanicatio� Towers aud �tennas in p�eparation for . -- developmenf of an ordinanc� addressing xhis issue in the City of M�unds View (Ordinaaiice N�c�. 588) " i ' -, 9. . Re�view oiLeCfer &o� Planni.ug Ca�nission to Ciry Council regarding imprav�irag communication =..�. - - - between CounciI and cornmissions �,c-.v _ � : W �' �,. �.. .. t�.,�R� �T . .. u:.,.l . �� +" � c...Ar ; t:Y,;-, c�;Lr, • . i'a '�S-c.�r`�.+� i�,i"t c`�- .�_"t`, e�.d:;"L.� a-t t�.�� - ia. s��o� _ I 1. Chairperson and Piaruting Caffimissionecs R�ports . 12. Adjournment .. _ . _ � . ...._, . .� . ._.. . .. .�, _ . , , �) ', ,,,� Item ��9 � �. � � != �'o: Mounds View City Council Fro�eo Mounds View �lanning Commission Subjecte Improving Communications Between City Council and the Commissions Dat�o October 9, 1996 /;•° ' �� We undersfand that the City Council is inierested in feedback on how communication could be .� improved between the City Council and City Commissions, prompted by discussions with �he� ar� Nelson, chairman of the Economic Development Commission at your September 30 work sessior�. Part of this discussion concerned the role and responsibilities of the liaison who is appointed by City Council to each Commission. There was also a list of suggestions made by tihe Economic Development Cornmission on other ways to improve communications. We have discussed tk�is issue a� our October 2 rr�eeting and would like to offer the following comments and recammendations. Role o� ihe I.,saisore: The Planning Commission feels it is very important that the liaisan appointed to the Plat�ning Commission attend our meetings. If it is a question of time, we would recommend that fhe liaisom give first prioriiy ko atiending the agenda or discussion meetings which occur on the third Wednesday of th� month. The work of the Planning Commission is concemed with the fute,ire fabric of the community, and we invest considerable time and thoughtful deliberaiion on each case presented to us. We feel it is very important tha� a Councii member be present to be aware of th� issues explored and points of view expressed, so this information can be conveyed to the � remainder of the City Council when a case is before you for decision. �lithaat a Council liaison, we feef the Council may not fi�lly appreciate all aspects of a case and that this uncierstanding is important in ma�Cing decisions on these matters, A� the very leasi, we want each of the Comz�aissions io be treated the same in the level of commitment give� by the liaison to coming �o Commission meeiings. This commitment has been somewhat uneven, depending on who was serving as the liaison. li�lounds View City Council Communication between Council and Commissions October 4, 1996 Page 2 �tt�e�° Icieas for I�nprovin� Comrnunieataon� i .,.: ��:i- � ��.., /� �x:- � � �Jl� ��ti`�� r We think that it wouId be advantageous for a Planning Cammiss�oner to be present at � ihose City Council meetings where a planning case or variance appeal will be heard. `T-i�� Pl�n�ir�g_Corn�is�ioAer-�shotald��s..ir�uite�-t-o-��r�a st�r�rna�c:..o-f��P-1�,��tg.. �ommis�ron's�positi�rr�-c�zrtY�~c��-�s-par�-of�e-p.r�ser�.tatiQZ� o€i�facm�tion-�atL�e_Gity_- "�rxr��il: -- The reasons For this suggesiion are similar to those discussed above. Our ability to present the Commiss2on's basis for our recammendatzon woutd assist th� Cauncil in your decision making role, and we would be present to answer questions from City Council about �iow we arrived at this recommendation. We have been concerned in the past that applicants have sometimes misrepresented what happened at the Planning Commission meeting in their comments to the City Council. 2. We agree that an annual or biannual joint meeting of the Planning Comm.ission a.nd City Council would aid in the communication of goals and objectives. One af these meetings couId include a tour of t�e city, during which significant development sites could be viewed as weIi as the physical resutts of previous Commission and Council decisions. The tour may not be necessary every year and could be planned as development dictates. It has been the Council's praciice in the past Co hold a discussion of goals and issues each year with the Commissions, and we would urge that this be con�inued. We see a lot of potential in the idea of joint meetings between the Pianning Commission and the Economic Development Commission wherz a project needs to be reviewed by both bodies. We would Iike to meet with the EDC to deveIop this idea further. 4- We would appreciate receiving the minutes from the EDC as a way to stay informed about potential deveiopment projects. Sincerely, MOUNDS VIEV� PLANNING CONINIISSION Jerry Peterson, Chairman 'j l � ,: . � .. . ` .-._.., i.; Item ��8 � � : :� ;� T- ,��. �'�o Mounds View Planning Commission From: Pamela Sheldon, Community Deveiopment Directoz- Sub,�ecto Wireless Telecommunications Towers and Antennas Planning Case No. SP-001-96 I3a�ee Ociober 4, 1996 IVTeeting of October 9, 1996 Isst�e This item was scheduled for discussion at your Septemb�r 18 meeting, Because of the lengih af the agenda, ihe Planning Commission deferred ihis discussior� to your next agenda session which wilI be October 9, 1996. Attached is the cepori which was sent io you for the Sepfiember 18 meeting, We have omitted the attachments other than the chart in the inteYesi of savin� copying costs. � Tl�c�rnrnendatiota It is staff's recommendation that the Planning Commission review the list of questions in this repart and indicate for each questzon lisied whether 1) there is a consensus on how the issue should be handled or 2) more information is desired prior to reaching a consensus. m Item ��il 9/t8/96 � � � �= � �: To: Mounds View Fianning Commission .�� s°o�: Pamela Sheldon, Cornmunity Development Director , Subj�ct: Wireless Telecommunications Towers and .Antennas � Plannin� Case No. SP-001-9b ��8t�o �e�3�@III�EY � Zy 1 �� Nieeting of Sepiember I8, 2996 , Issue The City Councii'has enacted a 180-day moratorium on new used, developmenY or construction of commercial wu°eless telecommunication towers and arntennas wittun th� City of Mounds View. This aetion allows the City approximatety six rnonths in which to develop reguiaiions for these faciiities. The Planning Commission conducted its initiat diseussion session on this issue on August 21 and directed staff to prepare a list of questions which need to be answered before an ordinance can be drafted. Recomr�endltio� It is sta$'s recommendation that Planning Commission review the list of questions in this report and indicate for each question Iisied whether I} there is a consensus on how the issue should be handled or 2) more in%e�nation is desired prior to reaching a consensus. �ack r� ot�nd/fln�lvsas The Piannin� Cammission has received considerabie background infoemation on this issue prior to tl�is meeting, as well as receiving information from industry representatives and the Cable Comrnission. At your meeting on t�u�ast 2 i, you asked siaff to assemble a list oi questions whach need to be answered before an ordinance on wireless telecommunications towers and antennas could be draf�ed. This list is noted below. �'ou have also received a chart surnmarizing pravisions from ardinances adopted by other jurisdictions in the area witich we are irtcluding again. Ttiis chari shows how some of the other jurisdictions in our area have answered mosfi of the questions Iisted in this report. , Mounds View Planning Cocnmission SP-OOi-96: Telecommunications Towers and Ant�nnas Page 2 Segte�nbe�r 12, I996 ' Defanataons 1. VGlhat terms need io be defined? Location; Type of rTse ' 2. Where shauid towers and antennas be atlowed? i�7hich zoning c�istricfis? 3. Should they be listed as allow.ed or conditional uses? 4. Should the CiYy requir� co-(ocation of equigment on a 1°uruted numbec of towers? 5. 5hould applicants be required to provide room on their iower for other compani�s' equipment? 6. �houId the City specify where on the property the tow�r musi be located? 7. What should the setback requiremenis be? �. Shauld the City specify that �he tower must ga on a municipai sit�, owrted by the City? Lrghting/Sigrrage/Color/Desagn/Lanasccrping & Screening 9. What allowance or limits should be put on ii�hting a tower? 10. Vdhai allowance or lienits should be pu� or� signage an a tower? I 1. Shauld the Ciiy specify the color(s) alIowed to be used for the tower? 12. Should the City specify the type oitower? �hat tower design is permiited? 13. Should separate accessory buildings be permitted? I4. What design standards should be established %r accessory buildings? i 5. What landscaping and/or screening requirements should be established? Height Limits lb. What should the height limii be? 17. �hauld a bonus b� given for towers holding two or more coenpanies' equipment? Miscellaneous I�. What provisians should be made far non-conforming tovaers? 19. Shouid specific provisions for abating towers in violation of the Code be stated? 24. Shoutd the Ciiy requue removal of obsolete or unused towers? What time limit should b� used? • 21. Should the City require documentation that emissions from these arrtennas will not affect other wireless commurucations? 22. Should the City require proof of r�eed? search for aliernative sites based on cee�ain critecia? , , ,.. . . ,: .. , >; :� . , ; �: Mounds Vi�r Planpung Commission SP-0� 1�96: Tel�ommuni�ations iowers and Antenr�as Pagc 3 Septeinber 12, 1996 Add'etional Ynfo�agion IVlatt Danielson, representing �BA, Inc., has provided copies of two items which discuss whether there is a potential healih hazard irom personal communicaiion systems. VUe atso have received a sta.ff report and sample ocdinance from Richfield, which is in the process of updating its regulations regardin� ieiecomcnunications facii�ties. These items are attached. cc: Coraiic Wilson, Executive Director, Norih Suburbar� Cabie Commission, 950 Woodhill IJrive, Roseville, MN 55113; FAX 482� 1262 Changell Kadin, Zoning Maa�ager, CB Commercial Telecommunications, 25�0 University Ave. West, Suiee I59S, St. Pau1 MN 551 I4; FA� 645-1526 Matt Danielson, S�A, Inc., 7525 Meero Blvd, Suite 235, Bdit�a MN 55439; FAX 830-1924 � Attachments: - � Comparison of Oedinances on Wirei�ss Telecom►nunications Facilities (chari) Staff Report and Proposed Ordinance, City of Ric��fieid "What is PCS?" "Radio Frequency Exposure Considerations Applicable to Personal Communications Systems" specprojltelecoen.pc2 � �i m � � � � N O F O m � � G � � � � p � � N :-� C1 7 � f"' ;� 7 ° u ¢ � �i�, � 3 a . . :U � � J C a c Q O c 0 �n 'G :� U 9 `o�. ° � � j u .� C O C a^.. qy.y N � y � v 4� p � � �•y7 � � ��•� ry� G 3 O��+ S m 9 C C W $ ^q'�° m U'Ca,°- �•^' y.j = !! u „� -3yL.��y,��o� �.=_c`'° `�° E� • 6.� s °� m c o e� � e �'S � m'�' S m� j � a� • c�r w c•� � w.� V= m�� Z.' v ° L' v �i �.5 m a,°n .S �o m� � 3 m^ 3��. u�2�.N �aa�2��'3m[� �•°�� =�� U � " °� V S � c � " � �v � U m c C S� � � U � ^� o % o, c e G e 3 o y •° m .a ° � u �' ° '� �� ° a� � •" "� u _'u uC u ° �,.G :g > u e � •c 6 •5 � u .Dp> _ �e Co ❑ 6Ci m t0 4 N J� � W�1 � 0. ab N'O � Ca G U a4 m{� J J� . U O C a •C c e � � � ro C m m � .. - � � � .� � m m - 3 o � ° u '� c ^ C � s e o � E u � � 83_ 4 C �� ,� . o o O W O � ��o 9° - � C C U O� L �� U'� o N N 3 U � � U � � c ... � o � � 4 � V � � q u •� � ' � '� � � � u�=°m a y � m � q �+ m�» OC C.� O 6� 6' C'm.3. U G � ar �° C �- � 6 � y' U � � C�j � C 4 C C Si C 3 C C'a m a.. e c o o m� m u�� o m y cH H u>p h V � 0 �' n ° T � �ti � y m m m a 4 �� y u p V� m � p G � '� � u .., d � C := K : _ � 'a � ^.°. u�, y ?.y Q p E 3,�i �• y—y� =� i� . '.7a a U �UI C 0. m �. .r�. �fl u C � :a � �i � � � .�. G N N " Q = v U .� a � ~ � T a ° G q >, o � L • . � - is . S � U C c� 3 r°� `'. � � � '.� � � _ � W j " _ '' b 3 Q ° c � d � m �� 3�" A = �; � � �a � °°°-_�'� � 's ,�o.� .'^ o � a ` .. n � ._ " L " � � � `u m -� a � C� J^ � � �•U � L � a J �� b a�n s V -� U V� U OO h R9 Cx �O ?��i ^» n 4: �O � C��^� �+ � � �:^ � T ^ 7 y v J' ��JbO � j �.'. m�. U � O d o C � a � � 3 � � � � � ° " o � -° r -^ ''r'. � H " g ` ° `u � m. � ° Y �' r � o � ° � o = � .°c� � � a �O = ' E� _ °� °c�v � - . 'o � _ � = '^ � ; � Y -- ; � ^ o .c Y c ° u ^ i ? a - 3' � .�i. > y 9 ? � � a ti � � � � oo � � c�.i 4 ` � � $ T � � � � � � � a 3 5 m i. ? ��,�, 4 c �� •� �` ? �: a � z m � � o' -° a� a-°i 3'o .`'-..' y u � �u a a �` s � •n � :i $ e � m m j � � d - � a n�_� 3 3 . o - � � o � - a o � C � U � `e 0 c 0 0 � � C 0 u u 'a .� o � � n a v O °� x U � Q ` S c`a �'�o 4 ` ----_- �.. -'r '` z: I_ _ ---- - � ' �, U O j 9 � ti O G U m N— _ ` ,S u c u s U T � ^�'. � 7 � 3 � � v � � :. `o � o � `� m c .. m w � 0 a, ° [ = � .� � �3 �a a 3 a °- u � � o � � � G �� 3 �._ ��''o 3 � :� o � a � %� . 3 Q y � V '' � m Y � O mu `J � •T [ �y �'� � 0. '� O � � � e ` v � C u � c � � � - S � 3 � q P] � � '= Q. O � � 9 � O � .. _ = y N m ,+`� � e . _ u a � u � u �o u u �, 3 .-,o � '� ^ - `o 0 ° U c ° • 9 � m� y U � ti � o� N h . � �' � p ;� p f o � 3 .0 � � m � L a � � a 3�u �g O Q . � - �' �. O � $ ? '` ''� a +� o u vi r 3 `� N 3 O ` a � [ o � _ c cti_a � 0°= 'u 3 a � J � - '� 3 � ]D O •� ''� W =�� E a` m w � a�. d o r a g 3 � o �� au.^ = � a �J � � � � � e � � � = � o -�,_. �� e a n" � .� c a � a°_'z j'� o,�, � C J T�� 'C � a� m� ti a ? � � z "� �+ .. � � a' ^ _ < .�` � rt' �. � u n- � L 4 _ o c.. � T .�. � ' m � � u v '° "' � ` j T �_ _lA3i�n� 3 J ,��a��=C a 3 a C = � ° � � � � � v � � ` � � s � � � R �' � � auo�,�yo1? ��^ =a,. omd'a - g ° o' " ` � � .= a w u .� � � 3 � o � ° ` � � �� ° - � ° _ = J - u o o � 3 � 3 0 � ; ., = r�.., oo _ ^ . � � 3 - � _ u � � 3 - ., ° 3 -� . `a ° u 'm �, ,,, S ° = �, � _ � � = ii - - r� � �.�. •�- 'o p �. �o ._ � ;� � C = y o q � > � ^ _ O u " _ o c.'_ - � C ' � °' � 'r '° °' 3 v � - i _ � ='- w 4 1 � a� " � �" 9 � +� a" - a •- � :� ^ �i m � �" a > � n : a � o m ,;'� � � � - v � - � � J � j 7 L � � � � ... .) .. d ^ 7 'J uf O - , � � + ° � e J O i p ` 'J ° � � N O ^ ��5;�;� ��m:-..� =��-� 3 � - � a, _ � - - 3 ' � ''' : '.'. o ry = m o� .� z� � a`-- ' - ¢ u ? � � � a � : � ;' .o' � o ' � ^% � M � ? '� n - _. _ c u � >. C 0 � a � � ? � s z" .,', .� ,. ; ;, _ ; _ .. ---�` -------:; ; � � .. ��-....\ �� . .,,:•\:• , . . . i ; �s �� C` � � u � L Y w U � V �U O � � � p ° C � j G }� A m o Q ' q � E � em u • s� c. 7 � C °3� � °D � o ea `^ 1S "> m b' �� o .c ` o°' '� ,'o y a4 -^ a' °e E d oo X m � 6 � � � u ° o U q � u � � � m a O - 3 � � . m: �3 m� m � a � C T •V C � G u �. O m �� i w m �•e•m . .°.. <� ° �'L " � $ � e c'o m$'o ,� 2�'' •3�� , e -�3'm � ° ;3 T�'= � � •`-�° a,a = g� m c'o� u � °e E � ° °s m � °_ °�`� s � � T • o. � � � � u w '^y a a � o'-' -° v � m'� 3 •c % A � y ? ro �p j O ` y � 2 � '� O 9 A� U m� C Y m? y � m a ' � •y � y �p� a � C T 3 G m'� m O `� m O ^ � C C U C � 7 � A Y. �p A y U � r � tl b Q'� � 0 O C � C � U, U :� , r 'C � � c `�a •—_ ��9 �� 3i � e s g• a �L � ��"� �;� w a o � _ ,°�� ,a .` � �O � m d c � � � O� ?-n � � y'r.i m s m �. x. � m � �- t! O o�yU C v � .^-. �0 � 9 � u '1 •C � :.� C 7 y ? U .V. � 'O tl � � � V�.�.� �� °' � �� 9� � �� _ o ° o � u � o y� � �' v �. .� � L O,C C � . m � " a u �� O � ° � ya � � C u � ? �� e m C m O. n U �'~i .�.. 9 e m -N+ � U [ � .. � � � a ' ° �-y-� y � q ;o � ^ ` ; � Z"_' � T r y .:C T v .� � � � '° o � ° U = '� ^ c'o " a �. o ' � E v� � J.0 J N b' � '� O � � a ^ '° p � o eo = c ^ � � 'v q -. � o. u " � '�i .:c w � 3 � � �'"- � � �� ? ;, _ 2 .a ;, � •= a o •c _ 3 � �� a 4 v °a '-°�� -� u� o-�'--� •r zm . u A 1S __ e� m r �n �' J -� ' j�� O.= Q � O O a� V. �;� J� d '< m d^ l G° op m O O � � O , � r � 3 � 'O u u r � � � 3 ` �. ` = a^o = � 3 c: � � o u E.� � �•= m � L J � � o�� oo `.. v a°,Y �•� ` 3 �� o 8 p ` _D J ? � � •'J o � � O ^ � ;j o � ` � " C .? � � � B e 3'm �°u u �: � 3 e e Ll �� a.d C � w C a o U � � � G �U V i� 4 � U � .` a .� u o u'� � 6 � u � � a , � m 3 � �.�. .. � o � � u r "i 2° a � u 'C 9 � 7 ., � � v a � � m � ��9 �= ?'.�. _ , u j � � h e ° _ .-. •s ° j C _ y U� � ;� � ? m-�° � y%c a s i �� d E s � ❑ � � � 3 � � ; a ? ii . xi - � "u � ° U � � 3 � J m ° � 'J' U V J 'J •�p °9 J � O j 7`,' U .�� 9 Vl J �Y ? VI S�a � ..i i ry =o d � U .V. w � O .� 4 ��=i � � 9 +� o� C u j [ L e��q m•� o .L � `. ,C � � ,u � m N C V�; C b0 C � y � >' � � a ' '� °'� 3c er�� E �3 �o ` ° •3 = '= ,� C� '� m � � _ C G > `� : u � � ° o . g .c O � � •V U � O C u °J 7'� > V.= e C C - ` � �y ti ? V C � r � G� v� � p V m J� a� N v3i �•� e .. Gi A� 6 Q' E VJ U�N G� U ' � C C 'a � u � � V C �+ � O d � � m c �xs�� .� L o1 C �= y S �i � � . V T 3 m � a� 4 S ° c '> ° �, o' c 3 a v = ' 0 0 . : m U "' C u T a u u` x a $•.� u� c � [C . �. u u ,y � �a `0 3 o E u - � � .0 -3 a m^ � � 9�+ U U — �O i� ' C C � � � O Cu V R G� 00 m C.Jro � d p C V . � u � V � 9 � ' - 7.? � S C L ,��, u b rJ _: �r d y V � J�� 9.0 . < �, 'u v�i � - � u y =� � ° C � VJ L m C� p v - O � L' m °' '.R .'d. C ci a�0 a� � � 3 m'7 i"> m� i. .. C7 E g. L u'� u d C� O� '= u ° � � � � a - u � .3 � "u � � c � � � T • • , � .s r � � � L N � a i�r C-r a' �' ., u �-J = M Y J ,G a .. _ � > J +] 3 . j �` } O , _ ' _ 9 � = � � O e � J �.. � � � ` � "7 ,.a� � � y � -� u � a.� a�=��°�y.-a - y� ;� c 3 � d�'> a o'a ' v � � c � v a° � a°°�o � � � - [ °. �, _ ? � ti 3 0` ' � � °_ ' � � � � o ` m o ,3 • � _ � o aa„ �U o g =�� n 6 O �� 7� �� J 8 � ' , � - �- -- •k�°. b.. 9 U� a',J .� j O. � � v a a=� a v e 5 0 0' � 3 � � G n u � � � � � u ,�'. _ a l ,� . 3'? ^ ` � e ° ° 'a � e ,a � o u �ap �� u ¢ _ z `9 �' ° � " u� - p3 > ; � " _ ^ u u = i.. � U •iC O' A � j 7 � � d ri i� .7w Q �.�^ Z .1a Q i ., ,; � � � � ,� ;�,' 'I'�: Mounds View Plarur�ing Comrriission �'�°orn; Pamela Sheldon, Commuruty Devetopment Director �ub�ecio Ptanning Case Nos. 461-96, 462-96, and 453-96 Mounds View Square Date: October �, 1996 Meeting of October 9, 1996 Iss�e i Mounds Vi�w Associates is requesting three types of approval for the Mounds View Square Shopping Center. Their overall proposal invoives adding two dinner house style restaurants, expanding retail square footage and iznproving signage for Mounds View �quare. The applications include: Case No. 461�96: a conditional use permit to a.11ow joint parking faciiities and driveways Case No. 4bZ-96: a variance request for the size and height of the shopping center idenfiification sign Case No. 463-96: a variance request in the parking ratios used for the shopping center Staf�has prepared iwo reports to cover these three cases: one report regarding joint parking facilities and driveways, and the var�ance in parking ratios; and a second report for the variance in sign re�ulations. These reports are attached. Ove�iev�v Mounds View Square is Iocated on Highway 10 and is the targest shopping center in the City_ It is a critical elernent in the Highway 10 corridor and ta the City's economy. It is importani that this shopping center remain healthy. The agplicant is proposing a plan for the future expansion of the shopping center, closer to its ultimafie configuration. This expansion includes removing the existing Bridgeman's Iee Cream Restaurant and the Hardee's Restaurant, and replacing them with larger dinner house style restaurants. The two exi§ting restaurants occupy 7500 square feet. The proposed restaurants would occupy 12,040 square feet, or an increase of 6300 square feet. The expansion aIso involves adding appro�mateiy 5,000 square feet of retail space next to Mario's Video. Mounds View Planning Commissian Page 2 October 9, 1996 The obvious quesiion raised by tliis proposal is whether there is sufiicient parlc�ng on the site. Planning Case Nos. 46i-96 and 463-96 are concerned with this issue, and involve a request to use joint parking facilities between the restaurants and the retail uses on the property, and also a request for a variance in parking ratios. The staff report labeled Iiem #6A concems these two cases. The sign variance is being requested due io the City's plans to build a pedestrian bridge over Highway 10, The bridge is proposed io be located jusi north af the Highway 10/Long Lake Road intersection with a circular ramp in the area now occupied by a detention pond at the southeast corner o� the Mounds �Iiew Square property. The staff report labeled Item #6B reviews and comments on the variance request, Planning Case No. 4b2-96. Our recommendations are this poin� are summar�zed below: Staif Recam�endation on Cor�ditio�al Use P��°r�ai�: Favorabte, allowing for joint use of parl:ing facilities between uses in Mounds View Square such that the number of parking spaces required is 454. Staff l�.ecoanmendation.o� Par�ing Varia�c�: Favorable, with findings as noted above. In ;':j particuiar, the City's parking ratios create a hards]-up for shopping centers of ti�is size, and the - shopping center contains both nighttime and daytime uses which cause the parking demands to be offset. �taff I�ecommend�#io� o� Sig� �Iariance: Favorahle to some adjustment in sign ailowances to address the possible visual obstruction created by the constiuction of the bridge. The discussion session with the Planning Commission, however, wiil provide a good opportunity to explore som� altern�tives to the applzcant's proposal. The sign needs to better relate to its surroundings, and may not need to be as high as is proposed to gain visibility for the shopping cen#er or may need to be placed in a better location. If a variance were granted, staff is suggesting that it be made contingent on the constnaction of ihe bridge and field verification that the bridge has ciose to the same appearance as is shown in the visual simutation. Staff would also svg�est that the sign have a brick base which would tie it to the arciutectura of the center. Item ��6B ,, ��Q�J�ST F'OR PLAN�II�1G C�i�ll�IISSIOI� ACTTOI� �eeian� I)ate: October 9, 199b 3taff' �tepo� by: Parziela Sheidon, Community Developer�er�t Diz-ector f Plannang Cas� 462-96 I� il� Nmo. 12�questo The applicant, Mounds View Assoc. LLP, is requesting a variance in the City 5ign Code to allow a cenier identifica#ion sign %r Mounds View Square wkuch exceeds the area and height requirements. Pe�it�aner: I�ocatior�: � 1"� `� t Zo�ing/I.ar►d tTse: Applicab[e l3egulationsa Attachments< �ackground: Mounds View Assoc. LLP 2535-2585 Highway 10 07-30-23-11-0079 B-4 1�lounds View Square 5hopping Center The regulations applicable to this reguest are sfiated and discussed under the analysis section of this report. Zoning Map Planning Application Letier from Paster Enierprises dated October 3, 1996 Diagrarrr showing Bridge Design Visual Simulation showing Sign & Pedestrian Bridge Concept Drawing of Center ldenfiificaiion Sign The City of Maunds View is pursuing the construction of a pedestrian bride over Highway 10. It witl span the highway just west of Long Lake Road. A preliminary design for the bridge has been prepared and submitted ta the Minnesota Department of Transportation. A diagram showing the layoufi of the bridge is attached. The ramp from the north end of the bridge is proposed to be Iouated on property ov�rned by the applicant and developed as the Mounds View Square Shopping Center. The appticant is concerned that the bridge will obscure the identification sign for the shopping center. The City is endeavoring to obtain an easement from the applicant for the rarnp. The appiicant is reluctant to grant such an easement without the City addressin� the possible obstruction to the visibility of the shopping center which might be created by the brid�e. Staf�'suggested to the applicant Pianning Commission Planning Case Na. 462-96: Mounds View Square Shopping Center October 9, 1996 Page 2 that �hey apply for a variance based on a visual simu(ation of the bridge and its reiaiion to the shopping center identification sign. Araalysis/ 12�cori�menda�ion: According to the visual simula.tion diagram, the applicant is proposing a center identifcation sign (or pedestal) sign which is 7S feefi in height and has a sign area oi800 square feet. The width is appro�mateiy 21 feet, based on scaling the diagram. So the sign face would be 21 feet x 38 feet, The diagram does not provide a full view of the sign in terms af whether there is sign area fio the ground. The actual sign area may be less than 800 square feet, or may be divided between two sides. It appears that the posts supporting the si�n are 11 feet apart. More information is needed frotn the applicant on the actual sign itself. A concept drawing was provided to staff some time ago, and is included in with this report for your reference. It shows a sign face 17 feei wide and 35 feet high, for a total area of 595 square feet. The Mounds View Sign Code, Section 1048,08 Subd. 2.g., i., and k., Section 1008.08 Subd. l.i. {6), and the definition af PEDESTAL sign in Section 1008.01 Subd. 6 include the following regulations concerning signs for the B-4 district, where this property is located. Section 1008,08 Subd. 2 i. B-4 Regional Business District: signs as allowed in subdivisions 2.g, hereof. g. (1) Signs no exceeding one hundred�{I00) square feet per business occupant. This inciudes all types of permanent signs, as defined in Section 1008.01 of this Chapter. k. Other Signs Allowed in Certain Districts: B-3 Highway Business District, B-4 Regional Business District and T-1 Light Industrial District may have, besides the one hundred (100) square feet signage per business occupant, one general pedestal sign not exceeding three hundred foriy (340} square feet. Only one pedestat sign is atiowed per property. Section 1008.08 Subd. l.i.{6) No sign shali eaceed thirty five feet {35') in hei�ht. Section 1008.01 Subd. 6 PEDESTAL SIGN: A g-ound sign erected upon a single post or shaft or upon two (2) posts or shafts that merge or touch at the base or which are not more than fifteen feet (15') a�art, center of shaft to center of shaft, with the disptay portion mounted on top thereof at least seven feet (7'} above the surface af the street adjacent to the property on which the sign is lo�ated. No such sign shall have a sign area of more than three hundred forty {340) square feet on each side. Such sign may advertise only b�sinesses located on the premises. No business property shall have mvre than one pedestal sign adjacent to each street upon �vhich such business property abuts; provided, that on each street frontage ofmore tha�j one hundred fee� (1�0'), one additional pedestal sign may be establisk� and ; Planni�ig Commission Platlning Case No. 462�96: Mounds View Square Shopping Center October 9, 1996 Page 3 maintain�d on such street frontage if such additional pedestal sign a} is located on a single pote b} does not exceed twenty eight (28) sqnare feet in an area on any side and does not have more than two (2) sides c) is not more than four feet (4'} in width and seven feet (7'} in height on the sign face, d) is Located at least seven feet {7') above the surface of' the street. In lieu of one additionat pedestal sign, two (2) separate signs may be tocated on the same pole, but such two (2) signs cotnbined shall not exceed, in area or dimensions, the limitations applicable to a single additional pedesta( sign. No pedestal sign shall e so designed as to have both moving parts, and moving or blinking lights. In additior� to the pedestal ihe proposal exceeds the heighi allowance of 35 feet by 40 feet, and the area allowance of 340 square by 460 square feet. The main concern of the applicant is that t1�e sign be large enough and high enough to be seen over the bridge. Staff would suggest the applicant consider proposing a structure which would be integrated wiih or better relate to the bridge ramp, and could be located on the east side of the bridge. More discussion wou(d be needed but a"be(1 tower" type siructure is a possibility. This would allow the st;-ucture to be lower and more visible to people traveling on Highway 10. Another possible location coufd be between what appears to be a flagpole and the telephone pole in the photograph used for the visual simulation, or integrated into the new restaurant building which wiil replace Bridgeman's. Staii questions whether it is necessary for the sign to be tall enough to display the tenants names over the bridge, when they do not now have this type of signage, and motorists cannot see the signs on the store fronts until you pass Bnidgeman's now. If only the name of the shopping center were visibie over the bridge, ihe sign could be reduced in height to approximately 55 feet, and require only a 20 foot variance. The applicant has an obvious hardship, and stafffeels there is justifcation for a variance to allow better visibility of signa;e for motorists trave9ing west on I-�ighway 10. Staff is not convinced, however, that the appiicant's proposaf is the orily solution and wouid suggest that some additional ideas be explored. In addition, the Planning Commissioz� may want to obtain some expertise in whether drivers could react to a sign seen after they pass the bridge in suff�cient time to turn into the shopping center. At a minimum, the sign needs to be constructed of materials that relate better to the bricige structure or to the architecture of the center ancf placed so it is not sitiing like an island. �t�if° I2eco�mend�tion: Favorabie to some adjustment in sign allowances to address the possible visual obstruction created by the construction of the bridge. The discussion ' session with the Planning Commission, however, will provide a good opportunity to explore some alternatives to the applicant's proposal. The sign needs to better relate to Plannulg Cofr�mission Planning Case No. 462-96: Mounds View Square Shopping Center October 9, I996 Page 4 its surroundings, and rnay not need �o be as high as is proposed to gain visibility for the shopping center or may need to be piaced in a better location. If a variance were granted, staff is suggesting ihat it be made contingent on the consirucfion of the bridge arad f e1d verification that the bridge has close to the same appearance as is shown in the visual simulation. Staff would also suggest that the sign have a brick base which would tie it to the architecture of the center. cc: 7ohn Streeter, Paster Enterprises, 2227 University Avenue, St. Paul MN SSI14-Ib77 FAX: 646-13 89 •.i l �'vV . . 768 p 7891 N N 7876 � 7885 7870 � 7�� ) 7863 9 �B, 7� 7851 .3 ,.�,�1� ' ) �gx va � � � � e� ,,,` '?r :�� "6 .1 � ...� `� � ��=� �<o � N � N y '11 527 2� �Z7 5&I 526 ZbO� �251 .'S41 5Z5 ��i 524 � 2a21 `�"`i 7S 7895 7866 �867 �asa �es� 784 7841 7830 � 782 � 7815 781 +� 7800 � 7809 7801 ns� � Tl6i 7755 �ry`� 7745 � 7715 JAU �O i �seo �aas � � �esa e ; N N � 7870 7869 7�8 7�? W 7853 �eso 7aes 7850 7835 7846 � 78�� 7840 7835 7840 7829' 7815 7Ht7 7790 78fl0 78Q9 d 78�5 7780 7801 O 7'7-)0 � 7BOT 77fi0 7797 �w iT5 F 7730 ��7 7760 � 7741 �� 7767 7750 7`731 7730 7°753 T730 7721 n2a rno nii m ,`�n I� 77d0 '� N � R_z R Vicinity Map � Planning Case No, 462-96 i�lounds View Square Sign Variance 7878 7875 78fi 7868 7870 Z 7861 785 � 7857 793 S 7847 78 7845 782 Q 7833 783 i837 7B1 � 7895 781 7827 78Q6 7Ht7 780Q 7807 780 T778 -7�g 775 7807 7768 7°739 774� �%�U 7748 rr�o 77tn 7741 //L9 ��g 7710 7"709 � `�. i/o1 a n co PF ¢ � c 7855 I n �o n m n � PINEWOOD CIR o, ° : � n n n m N N N M N 7715 n _ �n a m � r �n %70� N N N N v �N N r9 � � � O O v � �c G 9 =� � � W 53� S 33` S ` SJa i�D2 s. =, 8—Z � ng. � � �' ;;� + �_^ � � . �: AFPLCr';%Jl°; Paster Enterpzises dba �ounds View � Assoc LLP �� 6�6'-790I ��}[��: 2227 University Avenua, St. Paul MN 55I14-167i FAX: 64b4I389 Streei Address, Ci�, �tnrv, artid Z'ip Code fnterest ir� Pro�erty (C:tec3t apQropriafe baxj: � � �wner at Praperty ❑ Canftaci for t7e�d Owner Q Lessee, Operatar, Mar�ager Q Agreemerrt to �urc.°�ase '❑ Other {explainj � . Ooa�m�rtary evidenca a? a.p¢lic.srot'� irrt�eat in �� praperty may b� requir�d bernr� Snal C; tY e�'aon af �i.� r�u�c �F?a�� v�)L�/��}' �`��'�� L.�Ca�iOBi 2535-2585 Highway 10, Mounds View MN 55II.2 Lrgai f�es:.� iptian or Prcperry lcentinc�.�er� N�:m�er �°��IOwner� Narr,�/Adaress F�°esen# Use (c3�ec:c a�proq�iate �ox): Current Zoning: B-4 Q Ue�develcped/�lar..�rrt ❑ Single r=amily DwNling - ❑ Duntex/i'wo FamiIy �w�ili�g : _ _. - - -- _. - -- _..,.._.__—___----.._. . .. � Mult[-�amiiy {Na. �f Unii� - - _ � �USt�i@SS/CQR1171�fG� �S'.�bllSlitfl�P1C - � �itGdLJS$li3� G��flSf'If7TeP]t [7 Other (ex,otain) Pranerty Gassincatiar�: [ Abstr�� i vrr�ns �'°1�'�U�jT: ondiCional Use Permit to allow 'oint use of ar�i.n ' (Section 1I21.15} Z) Variance in Rumber of parking spaces rev_uired based on revised parking ratios from those in Zoning Code. (gection 1I21.13) 3 Variance in si n ze ulations for shopping center identification sign (Section I008e�&) °c!a3sa na�e: Aoo�icarrt rnay oe resconssole �cr acareianal ;ees assoc:at� wifi the rev,�ew ai �his recu�� ! f-(E:�E=Y DE�L4f-tE T}�Ai ��-,,'� ,4�QVE Si„�„ i��i�d k t;FE t nU�. Reznning Veriartc� C.x�i�anal Usa Pgrmit C.aae ,apce�i O�veiQO./Site P!arr Fi�vi�x diinar Sue.qivisiq�y ,4lazsr Sur�aivissan ::•m�. ?tan Amertdm�rrc 'Neei�nc :Jtar�art ��mrf 'Natlana 3urfer Peamd r'�8J7nmg Sigft ��J � r�J 0 .ameeidmoreY Qau� �P-o��-cCG' S2CAlacr�. minimum S^<tl0, m�rn� S1.00D �-i '� �-2 - Si r. .�i a�fers �OCi n-t � +�2 • a� 5. .�l athees �CU �7a° SiQUla�:e. �ninimum 100..�r�cimum �iA S9517 Sc=9 pius $Z°0 decaosit S�Ca S50 pius aeQCSrY derarminea .�,v Slarf Sifl " $v� �..'� Si 50 Daxg aY final ac��arr � � � � �� A?P iaV�� y [��.�fIE� � �` � ..m i;.c'L� �, �. -, n. . �gnature ��c ; .:� Oeoic�an t°e� Oe� Psid n�caiot �iumi�ar i orsi Fa� ?sid Q� P�ia r?��aot Numc�r ,�dditic,nai Fee r�� eca r':�id �C�OY ;�fUCtfO�P _ f1.11_. _ � _� 1 1. . _ _. . DEVEL.OPMENT AND iviANAGENIENT OF SHOPPItiG CENTERS 2?37 University Ave. • St. Paul, �4�! SS I E4- I677 • 6I2-fi46-7901 • Fax 6 i 3-646-1389 October 2, 1996 CBNTRAL PLAZA 45tt� & Centrai Ave. N,E. Minneapolis, Iviinnesota Ms. Pamela Sheldan Community Develapment Director City of Mounds Vievu CRYSTAL SHQPPWG CENTER Z4Oi HI�F1W8j/ �I Q Bass Lake Road 3e Wcst Bro�idway Crystal, Nlinnesc�ta �OUf1dS �/t@W, MfV. 551 i 2 DOD�WAY SHOPPING CEN'I'�R Smitl� & Dodd Road West St, Paul, Minnesota L�XINGTO[Y PLAZA SHOPPES Lexington 3c Larpenteur Roscvillc, Minncsota Re: Pylon Sign Variance and Relocation Request fior iVioundsview Square Shopping Center. Dear Ms. Sheldan, A proposed pedestrjan bridge is in the planning stages to cross Highway 1Q in the vicinity of Highway 10 �nd County Road i. When this bridge is constructed it wifl bfack the view of aur pylon sign from �raffic traveling west on Highway 10 and north on county Road I. ��EVDOT,a PLaza, But for a relocation of the pylon sign site and increasing the stat� M��y. t�o s� �a�a rz�a� py�on sign size an undue hardship will b� created on the i�Iendota Hei�,i�ts, f�linnesota identificafion of the shopping center from passing #raffic. btOUNDSV[EW SQUARE H�vy. 10 S. Long Lake Road \-touncls Vie�v, �(innesota NORTNWAY Si-iOPPiiVG CEVTER State f�t�vy, 23 & bVoadland Circle Pines, ,i�[innesot� SIBLEY PLAZ� 1Vest 7Cli 5treet & D:ivern Si. Paui. Minnesota �OUTHVI�bV SHOPPING CLNTLR Soulhvie�v Slv(i. & i3lh A��e. S Sou�h St. P�ul, Minnesot:� Please find attached, a drawing indicating the proposed location of the pedestrian bridge and the additional sign size that would be required because the sign would have to be lacated further to the west of the existing location. Also piease find an elevation of the shopping center site indicating the area that is requested for the new pylon sign iocation. A,t the present time it is impossibie to determine the exact relocation of the pylon sign. The relocation site would be determined a�ter the bridge is constructed so that the best site can be selected. ihan{c yau for your time and effort concerning this issue and if you have any questions, please coniact the writer. CENTRAL PLAZA 45th & Central Ave. N.E. tvlinneapoIis, ,'V(innesota � DEVELOPMENT ANL� MANAGEM�NT OF SHOPPING C�NTERS ?2'_7 University Avc. • St. Paul, MN 55114-1677 • 612-6�FC-790i ^ Pns Gt2-G-16-1 �S�?,. �lt10EC8I�/ j/OUfS, i1/IOUIVDSVIEW SQUARE ASSOCIATES, LLP CRYSTAL S HOPPING CENTER , Bass Luke Road & Wcst Broadway /� p�✓�2��-c'(> Crystal, Mic�nesota j� John H. Stree�er Construciion fVlanager DODDWAY Si-�OPPII�zG CHNTER Smith & Dodd Road JHS/.tE West St, Paui, Minnesota i Enclosures LEXINGTON PLAZA SHOPPES Lcxing[on & Larpenteur Roseville, Minnesota (v1ENDOTA PLAZA Statc Hwy, I l0 & Dodd Road �lendota Heights, Minnesota M�UNDSVIEW SQUARE Hwy. ] 0& LonQ Lake Road Mounds Vietiv,�Minucsota :�ORTI3tiV�.Y SHOPPING CENTER Statc Hwv. 23 Sc Woodland Circ]e Pines, Vlinnesvta S[BLEY PLAZr� West 7th Strcet & D�fvern St. Paui, ,�linnesota SOUTF{VtGW S[IOPPING C�i�TER 5outhview [ilvd. 8c 13�ii f\ve, S Soulh St. P�ul, hiinnesota � �G;..�r ��he e w' y � °uQ� � •�^ �� f �16 � LL �� 7 9 w N � 1{ i �I�� N� � =' 1� L oo�m ; !�. � � � � i� V Y.f � � � � � � �p'�`''�'"! _��__�.,� l( Vli �`'°u' �t-�-��U �� p/Pll� �� r � � � � o � � � � 0 L=—;J �0 � �-r•,� �-�� a � � � ��w �0� U g�aQ � ��o� � AR'NN ��aa a�� aFyw J��U arWW Wc� �! � ] , �J' �i �! /" . .� � �:" .� �. �,-� � �� j e /• N � N � � /q� // z/ /� • ,� m v �' / .� 0 � �: 4 W � � - �Q s Q J N ^� � q � w J 2 .na �Q zB � F � 0 m N U W � $_� �� :�3 z �� ~W x� �a �� _� �Q �, � a � � ga � �$� c os �' � � a � �n W �y o m � ��u �= ro v ma� -`� �d d w w � ? o�i ? � �m / / ' �' �, /� � � /, / 1 � / � 3 ' /• � / � �� / � / � % � %� . � �T O 0 � � ll� �:. . . . ., ., � ' 9 Ui J�." """".t edN W � � � � u W S N � d � � r � a a � �4 �� w O � �� n � w z'p Z X� m �� U ati� W wo� ��z z zow aNQ � W Z f ��a- aoa� .` .� E � � w a��€ u��ES � a �� U � � Q � ei � � a�'��al u�� w W p �� mQa ��w� � � � � �� u^ m g� �� t�s �a a � � � � � � � � :;m<r �;- 0 } { �i � � , � �i � �i � � �� . . i � i � p N �V � � � � �- a g m m fl � � y � � � a, � J.1 N - � � 4 � (n �Y d w, eh v q a0.a� s¢P� e Y�n � W p ` x ro�ww �p,OP�'P) w�e'� � m sm w @ , � ��,�Pam� 44d1 n ��t9� �"�m �� I. J� Q m \}a a3mw � �4�� v °' a3mw 0 � � C� 3,. F � m � � '—_ ' ' Y m ° � 0 o u . � � - - � 2 O �0 A � � 4 � �'/^�� J ��8m � � � �� W � n �� /� `\ .e a N w �. � � I'-f 'r �� o u f/l . 1 � 1 a au �� ' a \ �� NIU L� �M o ,@ ,e E g,�kem iMry*.�� e��'�'a �F�' ' . "'>�igi j� d � � w J � � y a � � w a a � � a � � _ Q' � d 1 �°'� E�s + r � � —; � x � _ 3 Q� � _�� T�� .... `i / � / � � �a � � 1 �e � �' � ,d � 0 � � �w � � `�i � � � � � � � �� we �r"'r--�� W J 4 � L n � w � �� } �� yll.[ � L Q v � °° � �� s � T �'P � 4 0 O Z �W w � (� � N Nw V � � 7r_�r� .._: _I; � �,_:,, . � : .� � � _` ... ; . � . , : .ti >,; _ .. F i . - , . • y 'y`'.:• /�'�..� � , � ��,.....� � � �, s � . - �� . . � - . '?�.r ' � ' . � . �.� ' • � t � .. ' . , � ; ' - - _ - . ° . + � . . . ,. _.� . _ ..._.�_..,�— � - � . . �� ... �.s . - • � . . . ....: ,..� -;�-- .y„ _ . ' ' ' i t� 41 . ';.: - .s . i .. '� 4'- " ... . . . . . � � , •'. - , • = �t! ' "-- . _ �e... . _ _ . _. ,._... ._.. .. .. �"l��1. : :t�sl-." - � i" ` T �° - .;' . . �'' - . i F. - � . - . . ... _ ,. .- --..� -:=:,._ _.. :; � t � � � :': �i =;� � :1� i `�� F � � �� . fi? V A ` ^X�t''� .— •_r-� -,�I±j�•�'�;�. �'l�,"' ,.`�' i � � . '�'.• J`�.',� .�. �, � . ;'_ ,y_�� , . 'i 1:'r:-i ♦e ; . , - ``K�i:; - _ j, i �4 I �: � '. V: -'f, . .;-„d�'.D�. "' . i �` ' i J ti ; J u7 j ., c; ; Item ��7 r.� x��;�,��.�-�r��:�i� w�� .� .cerr�rs: ►� � r►� � ��cr . _�, ;� r � . Meetin� D�tea s��$i�-tep�� ye P�asening Case I'ile l�to�: October 9, 199b PameIa Sheldon, Commuzuty Development Direcior �,� �. �eqa�es�o Approval of an amended conditional use permii az�d developrrtent review to a11ow the expacnsion of an existing auto dealership, ihe addition o�a car wash and expansion of avaiiable repair se�ices. Pe�itio�et°: I.ocat�orea ;, ,�.. , � Satum Development 2375 and 2395 Highway 10 08-30-23m31-0001, 2, 3 Zoning/ I.,an� ITse< B�3 The property at 2375 Highway IO is bein� used for the existing Satum dealership, and at 2395 Highway 10 for an existing Citgo gasoline station Applieable Regutaiaonso The B-3 district allaws for new and used auiozziobile dealerships, minor auto repair and car washes with approval of a conditional use pez-mit. �.�tachr��ts: � Pianning Application {being prepared) Zoning Map Resolution 4I95: Original Conditional Use Perenit Resolutzon 46I 1: Amended Conditional Use Permit Excerpts from Mounds View 240� Blueline Package: � Site Plan - Landscape Plan - Building Elevations �:�cicgroundo A subdivision and condifional use permit to aliow development of the now existing Satum dealership at 2375 Highway 10 were approved in 1992 �Planning Case No. 335-92}. Th� conditional use was amended in 1994 to allow the addition of 45 carafor-sale parlcing stalis, and associated lighiing and landscaping on the site (Planning Case IVo. 389-94). Resolutions 419�, appravin� the original requesti, and 4611, approving the parking tot expansion, are attached. I Planning Commission Planning Case No. 464-96: 2375 Highway 10 October 9, 1996 Page 2 The applicant is in negotiations with the owner of the Citgo gas statian property at 2395 Highway 10, just west of the Saturn dealership. They are submitting an appiication to amend their conditional use pernnit to expand their project site to include the property at 2395 Highway 14, #o add additional service bays and a car wash for customers' cars, and to expand the range of repair services. The current conditional use pe�nit states "orily minor repairs and maintenance will be ailowed on site excluding major engine overhauls, transmission replacement, and body work." The applicani is requesting that the conditional use pern�t allow for ail types of car repair excluding body urork, welding and painting. An�lysss/ Recoattmer�daiEOno The applicant has provided a site plan, landscape plan and building elevations to show how they propose to expand the Satum dealership so ii will inc�ude both 2375 and 2395 Highway 10. A comparison of the e�sting site tayout and the proposed site Iayout is noted belovv. . Site Area Building Area Parking Area Total Impervious Area Landscaped Area Parking Spaces - display/inventory - employee/service - employee/znventory - customer Total Number of S�rvice Bays Car Wash 1994 Approved Plan 2.488 acres, or 108,377 sq.ft. 5440 sq.ft, 84,327 'i7. S% 24,0�0 22,2% I54 14 168 5 N/A �� Pro�osed Plan 3.276 acres, or 142,703 sq.ft. l I,60� sq.ft. 109,097 sq.ft. 76.5% 33,60b sq.ft. 23.�% 126 35 20 183 IO one bay There are four sets of criteria which are to be used in evaluating this application. The fzrsi three are from the B-3 disirict and relate to motor vehicle and recreation equipment sales (Section 11 I4.04, �ubd. 8), minor auto repair (Section 1114.04, Subd 3), and car washes ; ', ;7 ; , .., - ,: Planning Commission PIaiuung Case No. 464�96: 23i5 Highway 10 October 9, 1996 Page 3 (Section 1114.Q4, Subd. 2) in �ection 1125.01 Subd. 3 by issue where appropriate. Lat Are� Subd. 3 d. Subd. 8 a. Subd. � b. Subd. 8 c. The criteria for granting of conditional use pernutis are listed These criteria are discussed below, and have been grouped A minirnum Iot area of twenty two thousand five hundred (22,500) square feet aerd zninimum lot dimensions of one hundred fifry feei by one hundred thirty feei {150' x I30') be provided. 1Vlotor vehicle sales shall be on one lot or coniiguous iots not separated by a public street, alley or other use. The minimum lot width shall be I50 feet at the mini�num required front yard. A minimum lot are of two (2) acres is required. The siie area consists of two contiguous lots containing 142,703 square feet or 3.276 acres, and has lot dirnensions as follows: North: 580 Feet East: 493 feet So�ath: 764 feet The front yard is on Highway I0, and exceeds the 150 foot minirnum width requirement. Items 3d, 8a, 8b, and Sc have been met. 5etback� Subd. 8 d. Setbacks shall be as required in the B-3 districi. Required Proposed Front 30 � 76 #'ee� Side 10 I84 feet (east) 232 feet (west) Rear 20 36 feet �a�ilding a�ci �ite I?esdgn; I,ands�apin� Met� yes yes yes �es Subd. 2 a. Subd. 3 b. The architectural appear-ance and functional plan of the building and site shall not be so dissimilar to the e�isting bui(dings or area as to cause impairment in property values or constitute a blighting infiuence within a reasanable distance oi the lot. PIanraing Commission Planning Case No. 454�96: 2375 Highway 10 October 9, i 996 Page 4 Subd, 2 £ Subd. 3 c. Subd. 8 e, Subd. 3 f. Subd 2 c. Subd 3 i. i ihe entire szte, other than that taken up by a building, structure or plantings, shall be surfaced with a material to controI duse, drainage and erosion which is subject to the approval of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. A curb not less thari six inches {6"} above grade shall separata the public sidewaik from motor vehicte service areas. At the boundaries of a r�sidential district, a strip of not Iess than ten feet { 10') shall be landscaped and screened in comptiance with subdivisions I 103.08 (1} through (5) of this Title. Subd S 1. A minimum of 10% of the property, excluding setback requirements, is required for landscaped greenspace. The plan(t)ing plan and type of shrubbery shall require approval of the PIanning Cornmission based upon a recommendation of City Forester. Subd 8 m. A natural screen shall be erected and maintained aiong all property lines separatiztg ihe site from any residential district. The screening shall include Iandscaping (trees, sluubs, grass, etc.) of a type (layout, species, heig,ht, size and density) izi compliance wiih subdivisions 1103,08 of the Title. The proposal represents an e;ctension of the existing Satum dealership. The applicant is maintaining the same architectural character in the b�aiiding expansion as is in th� original, and wili be landscaping the added site area so the effect will be one seamless development. All areas which a.re not in building or iandscaping will be paved and %he parking area will be bordered by a cancrete curb. The site does noi border proper�y in a residentiai district and therefore screening and buffering is not required. A landscaped area at least 10 feet in width is shown along all af the property lines. The landscape plan shows a row of Black Hills Spruce alon� the r�orth properiy line of the added site area which matches the existing site. The fron#age along Highway 10 wili be sod as is the existing site. The criteria from Section 1114.04 Subd 8.1. was added in 1995 and creates a probiem for the Saturn site. Ii states that the area in required setbacks shall be excluded from calculating if 10% of the site is in landscaping. The expanded Satut-m site would have 142,iO3 sq.ft. of tand; 10% would be 14,703 sq.ft. The proposed Iandscaped area is, 33,606 sq.ft. or 23.5%, which is more than twice the requirement based on percentage. Almost of all this axea, hov✓ever, is in the r�quired front, side and rear setbacics. Present day staff is r�ot certain what the intent of ihe ordinance acnendment was. It is a very �ommon practice for th� tandscaped area on a commercial site to be a1an� th� perimeter. In fact, the Zoning Code specificaily prohibits the placement of parking and loading in the froni setback, so ihe most logical use For the setback area is landscaping. The Saturn siie -� , :. `, Planning Cominission Pian�ling Case No. 464-96 Ociob�e 9, 1996 Page 5 2375 Highway 10 is very at�ractive, and the propased expansion continu�s tl�e placement oi landscap�n� along the perimeter. The ordinance amendment has the �ffect of requiring "e�ra" landscaping wiuch becomes a hardship on a large site with long perimeeers fronting on streeis. It appears to us that there may be an inadvertent impact created by the recent Code amendment. �.tghii�'g ar�d �i�rcage Subd 2 h. All iighting shall be hoaded and so directed that the lighl soarce is not visible from the public right of way or from an abutting residence and sha11 be incompiiance wath Section I 103.09 of this Title. ' Sabd 3 g. The lighting shali be accomplished in such a way as to have no direct source of light visible from adjacent land in residential use or from the pub►ic right-�f-way and shall be in compliance with Section 1103.09 of this Titie. 8 lighting arranged to deflect light away from adjoining residential zone or from public streets • hooded or controlled so as not to light adjacent properly a lighi cast on pubiic street shall nat exceed 1 foot-candle; on residential property shall not exceed 0.4 foot candie. Subd 8 h. All outdoor illumuiation on sales lots shall be provided with lenses, reflectors or shades which will concenirate the light upon the premises so as to peevent glare or direct rays and shall be in complianca with Section 1103.09 of the Municipai Code. Subd 2 d, Subd 3 j. Subd 2 j. Subd 3 m. Subd S k. Each lighti standard island and all islands in tt�e parking lot shall be landscaped or covered. All signing and ir►_formarional or visual communication devices shail be minimized and shall be in compliance with the Chapter 100�.08 of th� Sign Code Regulations. The applicant intends to install additional light standards on the expanded site area which are the same styie as the existing light standards, and they will be located in a similar pattern. The original plans submitted�for this development included a detail of the light fixtures which appear to be shielded in compliance with the ordinance. Staff is not aware of any complaints concerning iight spillage onto adjacent properties. The Iight standards will be in landscaped areas and not in the parking Iot, j': ;: ; � ;: ;' ;.: . Plannirng Commission Plaru�ing Case No. 464-96: 2375 Highway 10 October 9, 1996 Page 6 - 'The existing signage includes the followir�g: � e�sting monument sign 10' x 10' on 26' high supports; area = 100 sq.ft. � existing wall sign 23" x 2b.5'; area = 50.8 sq.ft. a used car s2gn, ground mounted 8' b-1/2" x 5' = 42.i sq.ft. s miscellaneous smali directional signs The total sagnage on the site is 193.5 square %et. All ofihe signage has approved permigs, The B-3 district ailows for 100 square feei per business occupant, and one general pedestat sign not exceeding 340 square feet. Only one pedestal sign is allowed per property, The current signage is within the a.11owances in the Code. The applicani is proposing a second monume�t sign at the northernmost driveway onto the site �o match the existing sign (100 square feet), The totai signage area would camply with the Code but the use of two pedestal signs would noi comply. There may be justification for a vaniance given the length of the street frontage along Highway 10 and the size of the site. Par��ing Subd 8 g. The following pazkuig requirements shall be met: , -; {1) All customer and employee parl;ing spaces shall be permanently and clearly mazked, (2} For every ihree (3) emptoyees, a minimwn af two (2) employee parking spaces sha11 be provided, (3) A minimum of two (2} off-street parking spaces for each service stall are required. The foregoing required parking spaces shall be shown and designated on the site plan. The eacisting site now has 168 spaces, af which 14 are for customers and I54 are for employee or cars in inventory. The proposed plan shows a total of 183 spaces, with 20 for customers, 35 far employees, arid 126 for dispIay/cars in inventory. The Satum dealership has 28 employees currently, with 12 more projected, for a total of 40. The sales office contains approximately 3808 square feet. The parking requirement noted above was added to the Zoning Code in 1996. Based on the requirement, the proposed d�velopment needs 20 spaces for service and 27 spaces for errzplayees. Using the parking requirements in the Chapter 1121 of the Zoning Code, 22 spaces are needed for customers.� The appticant's proposal meeis the City's parking requirements, except that two additional customer spaces are needed, three �andicapped spaces need to be �The parking ratios in Chapte� 1 I2 i state 1 space per 1Q0 sq,ffi. of retail space and 1 space per 500 sq.ft. of storage of warehouse space, Staff arrived at the requiremertt of 22 spaces for customers based on applying t6e retail ratio to half of the space in the sales building (1904 sq.ft.), and agplying the �e,azehouse - ratio ta the other half since the product being sold requires significant area for display. Planning Commission Planning Case No. 464�96 October 9, 1996 Page 7 2375 Highvvay 10 designated on the plan, and the customer and employee spaces need to be clearly marked. These adje�stments would resu(Y in I21 spaces being available for display or inventory. Wiih these adjustmenis, the parking coun� would comp�y with the ordinance. �raia�age Subd 2 g. Subd 3 e. A drainage system (for the ex�ti�e area), subject to the approval of the �irector of Public Works/City Engineer, shaii be installed. Subd 8 f. A drainage system, subject to the appraval of fhe Di�ector of Public Works/City Engineer, shall be instaIled and maintained. All provisions shall appty as included in Chapters 1103, 1010 and 1302 relating to Surface Water Management. StaflFhas not had an opportuniiy to refer this proposai to the City Engineec as af the date of this rep4rt, but will ob�ain comments prior to your November 6 meeiing. Ou�dao�° �toe°�ge, ��les ant� �eivic� Subd 3 k. Subd 3 0. Subd 3 p. Parking or car tnagazina storage space shalt be screened from view of abutting zesidential districts in compliance with subdivisions 1103.08 (1) through (5} o€ihis Title. No outside storage except as allowed in compliance witYh subdivision 4 oi this Section shaIl exist. 0 area is fenced and sc.reened irom view of neighboring uses; if abutting a residential disirict, fencin� and screening in accordance with Section 1103.08 e. storage is screened from view frorn public right o£ way • siorage area is grassed or surfaced to control dust • atI lighting hooded, directed so Iight source shall not be visible from the public right of way or from neighboring residences e shail not take up required parking spaces No outside sale or service eYCept as allowed in compliance with subdivision 5 of ttus Section shall exist. lunited to thirty percent (30%) of gross flaor area of principal use fen�ed or screened from view of neighboring residential uses or any abutting residentiat district; fencing and screening in accordance with Section 1103.08 same as o. above Subd � i. The maximum areas gerniitted for outside storage of motor vehicles can nor exceed two (2} square feei of outside storage to each one {l) square foot of enciosed ground floor area. Not more than one (1) automobile shal! be 'stored on each 40 square feet of outside storage. No rooftop parking shall be permitted. Planning Comimission Planning Case No. 464-9G 4ctober 9, 1996 Page 8 2375 Highway 10 � IVo outdoor sales or servicing is conducted on this site, other than customers viewing cars in inventory in the pa.iking (ot. There are no abutting residential districts, and there�ore, the screening requirements do not apply. Suf�icient space far car inv�ntory has been provided so it will not in#'ringe on required customer, service and employee paxking, The iast criteria (Section 1104.04 5ubd. 8.i.) was added in 1996, and raises a problem. The total enclosed square footage on the Saham site with the building addition is 11,600 square feet. The criteria would�seem to say that only 23,200 square feet of site area could be used for outdoor storage of inventory, The net area occupied by inventory on the siie is appro�imafiely 25,285 square Feet. (No drive azsles have been included in this estimate, only the outline ofthe parking spaces to be used for inventory.) Siaffdoes not believe criteria is pra�tical for a new car dealership, and it would have precluded the development of the originat Saturn cfealership. Staff needs some assistance in understanding the purpose of the requirement. We would suggest that as part of the conditional use permit, the area proposed by Saturn far inventory be approved. Ac�essory �uatdings Sub 8 j. Accessory buildings to be used soleiy for sales offices sha3i not be permitted. Such accessory buildings as are pernvtted shall be constructed of the same materials as the main structure. The proposed building includes both a sales of�ice and service bays. No accessory huildings are proposed. I�Ioise Subd 2 k. Subd 3 n. Subd 8 p. Subd 8 q, Provisions are made to controi and reduce noise. Na music or advertisements will be allowed over paging system, All provisions shall apply as included in Section 1103.01 reiating to noise within the City Code. Current staff is not aware of any noise problems on the existing Satum siie. The original conditional use permit includes a contingency that "outside loudspeakers shall be utilized for paging purposes only." ,Staff �,ould recommend that this con�ingency be carried forward. Planning Commission Planning Case No. 464-96 October 9, 1996 Page 9 237'5 Highway 10 Acees�l'Tes� Dr°�ve lZoutes Subd 2. i. Subd 3 1. Subd S o. Vehicular access poinis shall create a minim�rri of conflict with through traffic movement, shail comply wikh Chapter 1121 of this Title and shalI be subject to the approval of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. Test dciving routes and pattems must be submitted and approved prior to operation of ar� automobile sales lot. The applicani is proposing two driveway entrances on �iighway 10 and t�vao on County Road H2, and removal of one of the driveway entrances on the Citgo property. The driveway to be removed is close to the Highway 10/County Road H2 intersectian. This wili improve traffic patterns in the area and remove a conflict point. The original conditional use permit for Saturn states "A good faith effort shall be made to ensure that test driving of vehicles from the site follow the route highlighted and described on th� attached map dated 2/19/92.'y There is no copy of the map in the file or in the book oE City Council resolutions. Sta#� is not aware of any problems wiih test drives, We would recommend that the applicant supply a copy of the map dated 2/I9/92 and t�at this contingemcy be carried.forward, with the map put on file in both the Cammunity Deveiopment Departnr�ent and the book of City Council resolutions. �tackia�g S�ace (Car �Vash) Subd 2 b. Magazining or stacking space is constructed to accommodate that number of vehicles which can be washed during a maximum thirl.y {30) minute period and shall be subject to the approval of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. Subd 2 e. Parking or car magazine storage space shall be screened frocn view of abu�ting residential districts in compliance with subdivisions 1103.08 (1) through (�) of this Titie. The car wash proposed for this site is for customer cars orily and not for the general public. Staff feels that the issues noted above do not appiy in this case, because thE business owner has the ability to con�rol the flow of ca,rs, and the volume of cars is expected to be less than would be the case with a stand alone car wash business. ihe site does not abut residential districts. The area behind the car wash faces a business, but will be screened by Black Hills �pruce. Plagu-u�ig Commission Planning Case No. 4b4w96 October 9, 1996 Page 10 23i5 Highway 10 �ours of �per°ation Subd 8 n. The hours of operation of the #'acility shall not exceed 7:00 a.m, to 10:00 p.nn. The original conditionai use pernut s�ates "The hours of operation of the faciliiy shaii be , 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m." which conforms to this criteria. Prov��io�s IVoi Applecable to '�'�eis I'r°o�osai �. Whenever fuet pumps are fio be installed, pump islands shall be instailed. Criteri� %w Ap�roeal of Conditional Use Perm�ts (Sec�ion 1125.01 Se�bdo 3) (1) The use will not create an excessive burden on existing parks, schools, streets and other pubiic facilzties and utilities which serve or are proposed to serve the area. The proposal represents an expansion of an e�sting business. The site is served by an e�sting arterial highway and a County road, such that traffic can access the site without going through the residential neighborhoods. The site is served by utilities. Because the proposal is for a business, no burden on parks or schools is anticipated. (2) The use will be sufficienily compatibie or segarated by distance or screez�ing from adjacent residentially zoned or used land so that eacisting homes will not be depreciated in value and tliere will be not deterrence to deveIopment of vacant land. (3) The structure and site will have an appearance that will not have an adverse effect upon adjacent residentiai properties. The site is bordered on the north and south by roadways, and abuts a business and industrial park on the east side. The existing site and proposed expansion shows a attractive combination of buflFering and Iandscaping around the entire perimeter, and this business heips in cre�ting an appealing gateway ta Mounds View and to the residential neighborhoods north of Highway 10, It serves as an exampie of high quality development for potentiai developers of property in the area. {4) The use, in the opinion of the [Planning Commission], is reasonabiy related to the overall needs of the City and to the e�tisting land use. The expansion oi the Satum dea.tership to take in the Cit�o property will help unify this corner, and allow an attractive and successfut business additional roorrr, Providing more raom for inventory and expanding the range of° services available io Sa�urn's customers may translate into more tax revenue to the City. Expansion of the Satum dealership will ; ,' I �1 111 17 1 11g COiIIil]iSS10Ci Planning Case Na. 4b4a96: 2375 Highway 10 October 9, 1996 Page I1 also help i�r strengthening the vitality at�d enhancing the appearance of the �iighway 10 corridor. This corridar is very importani t�o the iong run economic health of the City. (5) The use is consistent with the purposes of tlne Zoning Code and the purposes of the zoning district in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use. � The purpose of the B-3 district is to provide for and limit the establishment of motor veliicle oriented or dependent commercial and service activiiies. It allows for auto repair businesses with approval of a condifional use permit. �Che appiicant's proposal fits within the limits envisioned by the ordinance for the B-3 district, and its iocation alon� Highway 10 is logicai and appropriate. (6) The use is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan of the City, The most recent discussion of comprehensive goals for the City was the Mounds View 2000 projec� in 1994. The Visioz� Statement from the Growth, Development ar�d Business Issue Project Team stated: "The City of Mounds View will be known as a city with a halance between business and residential concerns. There will be a positive business climate as shown by public-private collaboration to recruit, encourage, and retain successful, community-based enterprises with emphasis on job expansion, inarease in tax base, and quality of life. There will be a cooperative spirit between the gavemment and citizens, whether residential or business, when setting regulations into eode. Environmental and aesthetic.consciousness will be demonstrated by a redesigned Highway i0, a network oiinter-connected trails, parks, and wetiand spaces, and active citizen participation un ecoIogical activiiies." Two goais relative to Highway i0, and a goal on business ctimaie, were adopted and are inciuded in an attachment to �his report. The expansion of the Saturn dealership furthers these goals, and is supported. Sta�s oniy suggestion is that the applicant could add landscaping, including flowers, to the Highway 10 frontage to help beautify it. Siaff recognizes ihat it is the applicant's desire ta keep ihe Highway 10 frontage in lawn so it does not distract from attention to the cars oz� display. Clustering landscaping ai the entrances would achieve both purpases. {7) The use will nat cause traffic hazards or congestion. The site has adequate access from an arterial highway. Na added traffic congestion is expected. Eliminating one of the driveways on to County Road H2 will reduce traffic hazards and conflict points. i Planning Commission Planziing Case No. 464-96: 2375 Highway lp OcEober 9, 199& Page 12 (8) Adequate utiiities, access roads, drainage and necessary facilities have been or will be provided. ' 'The proposal will use a previously developed site which is served by existing utilities and roads. There is an existing drainage ditch along Highway 10. Sia�will be refezring the proposal to MnDOT and the Rice Creek Watershed District to determine if there are any co�cems with the site drainage�coniinuing as it has in the pasi. Siaf�' I�eco�nm�ndafion: Qur preliminary respons� tc� the proposal is very favorable. There are rivo key issues which need to be addressed which arise from the adoption of new criteria for condiiional use permits for auto sales i� T 99b. These are th� amount of landscaping required and the comparison between the enclosed building square footage and square footage in outdoor storage of inventory. We would be concerned if the new criteria meant that the proposal couid not go forward. The criteria may have been meant %r smaller sites, and represent a hardship on a site of ihis size. Also if is our impression that the ratio beiween square footage in building and in outdaar storage was to preveni the use of small kiosk type buildings for sales o�ces. The Saturn dealership is proposing a substantial building of 11,b00 square feet, housing both the sales af�ice and service bays. 'i Staff woutd recommend tkat the follor�ving additional information from the applicant or referral agencies is rzeeded prior to the ne�ct Planning Commission meeting. 1. Planning application and fees 2. Proaf of ownership and letter from owner of Citgo parcel giving permission for application io be filed on this parcel 3. Photometrics for light standards 4. Comments from the City Engineer amd Rice Creek Watershed District (staiito do referrat} 5. Provide copy af map dated 2/19/92 showing test drive routes. Staffwouid recommend that the following requirements or changes in the plans be made: 1. Bring forward confiingencies from Resolution 4195 and 4611, if appropriate. 2. Same Iighting standards be used on both sites, 3. Eliminate the request for second monument sign, ur�less variance in number of pylon signs allowed is approved. 4. Show three handicapped parking spaces, and convert iwo inventory spaces to customer spaces, to comply with parking requirements. S. Add note to pians that custozner and employee parking wili be clearly marked and kepi free of use for inventory. .: ;: , . . ; ' ;: i;: ;; ... Plal]Yilrig COYYtm15S1011 Planning Case No. 464�96: 2375 Highway 10 October 9, I996 Page 13 6. Provide detail on plan as to how trash enclosure will be cons�ructed. Shaw concrete pad. 5taffwould fiarther recommend that the applicani submit variance requests for; l. How the landscaping requiremen� is caiculated, allowing for credit for landscaping in th� setbacks, due to the iong street frontages bordering this property and the size of the site. 2. A reduction in the req�airement %r one foot of enclosed building square footag� for every two feet of outdoor starage space, giving consideration to the size oi the site and that a substantial building of 11,60� square feet is proposed for the site 3. An allowa.nce for two pylon signs due to the long highway frontage, and that the tatal sign area displayed on the pylon signs is 200 square feet rather i�han the 340 allowed. cc: Jim Price, Satum Development, P.O. �ox 10$13, White Bear Lake, MN 55110; FAX i90-9416 � ; , �S ;� ss � �e4, �se 78S 763 i fil 76.�9 76 76� � 7635 763 7 7fi55 762 � o °"� � i645 � 7625 76Z _2 ' �e o 7s� 7st � 4�1 ^ n n� n r 763 s� 761 W 759 759 7581 75 1 ��3 � ,D o s �0 7565 7564 ry`'�ry N N N N 7'S51 755 75�5 7a7 7523 752 � " 75a5 7504 .,5, �� Cl�`( HAE.L 5394 �� ti �� -�i JO :.. - , _ . 766j... ' --- ..l'_, � ; tf�.-,' 7 '=ray� o4y� � 5493 : _: , 'r J " 7651 5480 5479 ��,2 Sd85 5486 5485 55C?0 5474 5473 548@ 5475 5478 5475 �.. 7fi41 5458 5467 R°-� 5�s� �asa s�s s�s7 - 5462 5463 gq59 ' �' 783f 5445 545fi `s� M 5454 5459 g 44 0� � 5453 � 7531 � 5446 5447C� 5� �e,`f-�s �`�j 5447- �n a 5� 544� a F'�',S �B 54�. �n � 7521 � 5434 5433 S4 � 5433 n" 5425 5425 `sA? �° • 5425 BEl 751t 542d 5421 542 � 5419 n` � � $�1 5414 5415 5414 �n,� � N u� o e 5413 ^� %SO � N N N c�E N N rJ¢OG rJAO�J S4UG lV N N N N N S'±OJ N C � �R�v� 5395 5394 539 rn o`OO n° m;r°> ,° w n c�v o ar m � N fv N N N c4 N N N N N N�� 5342 5387 SJ86 S.�jB Q N N N(`t N C! (V N (V N pJ386 5381 � 5380 538i U 5380 5373 5372 537 � 5372 5365 S.ieg 536 53fi4 —� 5357 5.3,58 5359 5368 5 5358 � 5351 535? 5353 �� M� N"' � o m� 535� S�S� ty N N N N N N N (1� 5343 53q-4 5345 N N N�v cr cv N c, cv N N 5344 53 5,3 LAMBER AVE s��s�=$�� 5331 LJ1MUEf\1 N CJ N N N N N..�j �� Z�3� .. �` �i � J. N N N N �y N (V N N N 533C s��`�� ,��'�?s 5323 saz� PARK y � s�z4 �'; S�� S� 2 5317 �� 531 E ! 5309 S�9�i��• �s`�08 5299 530P > p� 53 2 0 530C _'� R°Z y� S2,gs � 5295 r m�. n,n or n�n rn r� �n a� P�n 529a m n r� �n �n �� n N N a rn rn m � M �U `J29 S2B% N lV N N N N cV fV CV (V N N ., Z lV N N N N fY (Y N N N N N N N N SZaF R-2 S— ° N N N N 'S27J �� i- v� tl�- i O 9 PQ1 N . i lV N!V cV fV cV � @ � N N 5275 � szso szsa 5z� 3z9 ��, ,��, ', 5256 526 525b 526 5287 �—� ry `y7� � 5267 ;� ' 5250 525 5250 5260 5277 � 524 52 5�5 � 5292 53U 5284 g— ,� � P � � 52 524 �+n n ��n o� r•� �n n ry , Y 5 3 52 5238 � � � � � � � � 5290 5289 � �y j 523 523 �24 N N a w cv c.� N N 528 528 $ZB N N `R'� Q $2� '� s7_37 CLE4RVIEVY AVE in � n cv 92st 5226 r�» v v r�i �tD., 5278 52 527 y`V w 521 523t r � .r � � •o- � �v cr a c+ N N cv 52fi0 52fi9 52fi 5Z� 526 Zb� waoo,a� F� 522 522 � O1 '°' "' n°� ^� 5259 5250 R�� n � 5� � w� u� a,n ,n c,i 525 525 525 525 $25 N 52C Jr2�9 rJa� rJ21 N N N N N N N N $2 5z4 n 52 5249 J`2 Je24 52� _ SzQrJ 'h .=::� ��':: ' � �v �� a �, 5230 5239 Z S23 5239 5230 523 523 ryry z � u� ut r�n Sil v.�r r y�, �� n cv W O I (y N N N N lY N N N N� N ��.y � 5220 5Z2g � S22 5� 5'ZZ 'Jri2 _ J�� nir�,� � � 5206 520 ,� �„� � n��+ � 523Q S21 � 521 521 5210 521 52i n�n io u� a� �� a c� r� .. . y� . 52a 5z0 N N N N N N c�.e c°�i � 5200 520 SZ00 520 5200 SZ09 5200 'L�' �`b^' S1SC SF 'r;�:�:':?i::�'-:�.'•:: 515 WOdOALE Ok2 � iS 13� :�::?-:'�:';'�:�:'.-=:�:�'r' S 14 S 150 5 F 55 18 � 51 °m °n �a �� `ti� � � 5132 ';- - `� , � � _ 514T 51 rJtBrJ c��a N N lNV N �. � siz ';: _ ri st�o st�s - EDGEW40D _.. .. �a �: 51 S 5 t 4U 5175 a �l�' ,�'S ;� SS20 `•:'.:_ ;i 5125 � 5i36 5165 s�so 5,6 JR. NiGH ti`� ;p sti :-_ =:;• s�t Q s�so siss SCHOOL, : J,, o stze stss � 51081 �'- �:: 5 3 09 z 5140 5149 �, � PF ��,::�:�•� � s�zo sias st�o si3 PU� ,�,, � � 0 cr w n a 5101 � 510 5135 pR 510 5101 0 n 5a92 � � 0 5093 5090 0 5090 5051 � } «7 508 � N � 5480 5081 5t0Q po 5079 Sa80 5075 ��, F074 507 507t 5070 507i �p� " 5069 5060 5051 - ,��9� � 5064 5068 SO6i sosa sos� aso sos� E� - sos _ ,� ,� �, _ sos sog� SQ40 504t � � n ° ��¢s N��.j N N N 5flb' P 5030 503t P N NN -_»�^._..�.,�e��_�� .d�__ Co��R� �__ • ...... .. . _� Vicinity Map° 464-96 2375-2395 High�,ray 10 � � A�niirant° �ar,,,-„ na<,,.-r,,.......�L Q �RP 1._. ; ,;: i RE�OLUTIO� NOe 4195 � CITY OF 1KOLirI�S VY]EtiJ COLTIVTY O�' R�f.SE�'. �TA'I9� 8E° I�Z��O'��i A�1'RO�iAL OF COI�I�ION�% LTSE �A�RI�IT REQ�JEST �Y SATU�T OF �Te PAT]L, 23.75 Fi�G�A� 7.0, PI��G C�.S� NO o 335-91 �REA�, �aturn of �go Paul has reqr�.ested Gity app��val �c� og�rat� an auto�abile �a1�s dealershi.p �t 2375 Highc�ra� 1.0 � and WHEREA.S , t�i.� Zc�a�ng Orda�nance a1.Iawrs auto�obile sal.es deale�cships ixa a B�3 8 iiig'h�ra�•r �ommer�za� D�st�icte; anci in�HE , the deve�opment, as prc�posed, requa.res a cortditioaaal use perma�t; and � T�iE ,�he Cit�r Co�snca.l has re�riewed the f�llo�r�ng dc��umen�s �egarding' thi� proposal: a} Site plan d��ed 11/91 b} Ligh�ing pl�r� da.ted and re�rised �./30/92 c) Landscape plaa dated 11/9i d} Parking plan d�ted il/918 and W�iERE�iS, th� City Counc�l h�s detexznined that the p�opasal is in conform�aa�ce �rith i�h� r�q�ai�emen�s of �ehe Mun�.cipal Code, specifically Chapter 40; and �REAS, the stor� water contr�ls for th�.s s�.te ure�e origina�.].y approved as part of the Mounds View Busa.nes� Park project and have been reviewed anci a�e canside�ed ade�zate by th.e Cit�r �ngineer; and T�RE�, the Plann�.ng Commission has recomnffiended approval ef th� conditianal use permit reques-� to �he Ci.ty Council in Resolu�ion 1Vo. 330-920 � NOW, Ti�REFO�E, BE IT R�SOLVED that the City Council af the City of Moura.ds Va.etia approves th� �ond�tional �as� permit w�.�h the followanc� cond�t�,ans o � , • : .- . . �-. .- : _ a- - .::' a.. . .: a• - . 2,0 �nly mano� repairs �r�d mazn.tenanc� �rill be �11oc�r�d on �ite exclud.�ng m�jo� engine ove�haulsa trans�issi�n r�placem�n�, anci bod� vao�ka �Y � � i ;: � � . • . • ;; " •: � � . . � • * 3. The hours of opera�i�n c�t the fac�,lity sha1.1 be 7s00 a.anm to IOzQO pemv � o. Aray fu11y �nechanized methed of washing cars s�a11 require a�onditional use pe�m�t per Chapte� 40e18, Sul�division D{2). 5 0 �,nY° cars taJcera on trade and not intend�ci fo� resale shai�. not reanain an �h� sit� fo� a�eriod of tasne exceedimg 72 hor�rs o 6e No outside �nerchand�zir�g oi �ccessoxies shall be a]�lowed a 7• A gaod fa�th effart sh�ll Y�� made to ensure �hat test drivinq of vehicl.es from the sa�.e foilovv the route highli,qhted and des�ribed on the ai�ached znap dated 2/19/92. `•, � o �.11 transpor� t�u.cle deZ�.ve�°ies and pick�up shall be canducted or� si�e dt�ring regular business r ho�°s . , ,� , 90 The condita�onal use perffii.t sha11 be revi.�wed a� , six mc�nths and each year thereafter at the time oi licer�sing to ensure that applicab�.e conditaons �mposed on the s�te are beinq met. .�T`I'E��' a i � E.�.L ) 1Q. Outside advertising shall be 13mi��e3 to that aliowed by l�unicipal Code. Ilo P�eavide adequate an-site parking for numnbe� of customers expectedo For special occasiora.s, a large�° num�er of custo�aer parking spaces sh��ld be made available. A_�.opted thi.s 2 4th ciay of Februar�r, 19 9 2. � ' y .P�dmini tra�� . �� , �SOLU�I�N NOo 461� CITY O� MoUNDS VIEW COUNTY �� RAMSEY STAT� OF MINNESO�� RESOLUT�oN APPROV�NG THE �EVELOP�ENT REQUE�T OF SATURN AF S�. P�UL, 2375 HYGHW�Y 10, PLX�NNIN� CASE NOm 389-94 WHEREAS, �a�urn of Sto Pau� has reques�ed City approval to construct an addition to their existing automobile sales facility at 23i5 Highway lp, a�d 4JH�REAS, �he propasal would allow�the addition of appreximately 45 car-far�sa�e stal�s and associated lighting and landscaping a� the site; and W�IEREAS, Chap�er �OOb of the Meunds Vie� Munic�pal Code requi�es that � develapmen� review be conduc�ed fo� this and si�ilar proposals; and � W�IEREAS, �he Mau�ds View City �ou�cil �as reviewed the �ollo�ing documen�s r�garding this developm��t p�o��sal: lo Pl�nning Application dated Juna 24, 1994 20 5ite Pl�n dated June 24, 1994 3e Submittal Nax�ra�.ive; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determ�nect that thg proposal is in conformance wi�h a11 applicable requiremer�ts o� Chapte� 1100. NOW, THEREFORE, BE iT RESOLVED that the Mourids View City Council approves the develapment revi�w request subject to the followzng conditior►o ��'TFST : ( SEP,I�) . , .;� ,, l. Tha faci,lity shall, following the Gompletion of the addition, be subject to the condi�ior�s . stipuiated in the original City Cauncii Resolution authorizing the use (City Council Resolution No. 4195, dated F'ebz°ttary 24, 1992) o Ac�op�.ed this 8th day o� August, 1994 a �. : Niayor � � _..,Aeting Clegk-Administrator . . � � �i_� `. : - . : ��, � . ; ; . ._ ,; ,; ,; ;�:. , �,�, . .: . , �� .- �..;.� -, - .. - �:.. • . .: �� s �� 1 �� ._ . to determine wh�ther to continu� position fundin�. . ! --m The City will establish an Economic Developnlent Commission comprised of busi� ness leaders and citizens ta serve in an advisory capaciiy to �he EDA and the City Cour�cil. � �— The EDA wilI develop a business p1an, includir�g goals for business retet�tion, re- czuifinent of new businesses, and increasing self-sustaining and high quality jobs. — The EDA {or t�e City) wi11 develop a pubIic Iz�fonmation pian to pubiicize the business pian. — The E1�A wili include environmen�al concerrrs in aI1 of its plans. The City CounciI wi11 adopfi a poiicy of incentives which vvill not only support and facili- °' tate the expansian of existing businesses, but wiIl also atttact new businesses to the area, with emphasis on filling cunent vacancies a.s weli as developing new sites. Such incentives will inciude: . — I�evelopin� packages on how th� City can heIp businesses (new and existing) succeed. � �— Reviewing business reg�alations in the City to simpiify and improve where passible. — Offering businesses financial assistance and introduciions to local banks. — Encouraging and working cooperatively with local busiaess organizations. ---� Passing resolutions of support to Iocal businesses when appropriate. -- Reviewing restrictions on busin�sses in residential areas. — Providing special opportunities for environffienialiy canscious businesses. •'I he Cfty vrill survey businesses locat�d on Highway 10 to identify concerz�s (if any) with the highway aa�d/or the City of �Iou�nds �Izew. - �'I'he City wili publish a brochure showin� favarabI� comparisons to surrour�ding com- munities, 11ILISiI3L1�1� Ilfe 1%1 IVTOUil�S V1eUl, inciuding: 1) �ow crime rates; 2} uiility rates; 3} property ta.xes; 4} comm�rcial and real esta�e prices; 5) distar�ce to airports and arterial highways. � The Planning Commission and the Ciiy Council will review current zonin,� and lartd us� codes for co�patibiiiiy with cor�temparary busin�ss ar�d cam�uni�.y nee�s, �a�th an e�phasis or� rnaintaining a balan�e betwee� business a�d residential �oncerns. �� Identiiy�ng unmet cansumer nesds throu�h research, focus gxoups, surveys, etc.; the City wilt p�epare � Iisi of businesses which could meet these needs, and recruit such businesses. �dentificatzon of the types of businesses that stakeholders do no� want to encourage could aiso b� i�cluded. � The City wiIl prepare a quarterly newsletter to notify bu�inesses of netiv inc�ritives b�r govemment agencfes and other business opportunities. � The City wiIl establish an Infarn�ation Center for 1Vi�unds �1iew. � i' � � � �� Irr�p�r�v� the �e��het�t appearance of i�hwa� I 0�n order to r�a�n��sn a iutly dev�lop�d and occup�ed hi�hway busin�ss �o�rado�a 1 1 Q L# I `Tt � T �" ° Work cooperativeiy wiih the landscape unit of MN/DOT to coordinate and use iheir Com4 munity laoadside Enhancement Program. � Coordinate with and make use of the knowledge of the Ivlounds �Iiew Ciiy Forester. � 5olicit a deszgn firm to develop a plan using lightir�g, flowers and grassy areas to beautify the Highway 10 co�ridor. � Ivlake use of service groups (i.e. L.ions, Scou�s} to voluntee� time and/or money for aesthetic improvement of ihe Hzghvvay 10 corrido�. m Develop incentives for IocaI businesses to improve sites by adding gxeenspa�e, flowers, etc. � Work wiih the Parks Department to implefnez�t their plan to conne�t bicycIe and waikin� traiIs throughout tl�e Ci�y to Highway f 0. .: ' �. ° [ � . � �� . .� �- .� . .. . . . - . ,; . - . �: ; ...; ; ; , �: , .� . : , • ° i �.. �. . , . _ . �. ° Consider an�ending portions of the City sign code to allow for increased directiona.l signa�e along Highway 10. � •. � Take a�z active roIe in the plaaning of exitsy PsIIL1aI1CPSy and turn�arounds in and around x�g.�way io. Develop methods for connecting th� nartherrg and southe�n sections of tawn across Highway 1Q, s�ach as by buiIdir�g a pedestrian anci bicycie bridge at L,ong L,ake l�oad ar County }7oad I> m -� ; � .�.. 1 , , �' . - ;: : f , : � ' :l 1 ",, ` _ � • > ,, , �# � � �� - ' � �� . :; -�._ � , ��; � . . - . . �� : �� , ��. .�, ._ : � ` , ,i ". .� ,r t , . � � � , � , . �� f �}. ---- -- - — # ` � R i. . � .' .i ,_ _ SECiI4IV I. T'itle 1114. 02 of ihe idlounds iTiew Z�riang cod� sp�agl b� amended to read: 1 i 14.02: P� °I'�D `T�S: The foll�u�g ar� perrrutted uses ir� a�-3 District: . a4II perxnitted uses as allorn�ed in a g_2 Limited �usir�ess District. �usement centers.. Cornanercia! recrea�ional uses. C"rrocery stor�s, sugezmarkets. IViot�is, motor hoteIs and hotefs; pravided, that the lot area contains nat less thari five htandred (590) square feet of lot area per unit. , ,. , r� ,�f P�zvate Clubs or lod�es serv�t� food and bevex�ges wi�1 use bez�g restricted to rrletnbers and their guests. Adeq�ate diriin� room, kitchen and bar space must be provided according to staradards imposed upon siiriiIa� urrres�ricted customer �peratians. The service af alcohol bevera�es to members and tkzeu �u�sts sha.11 be �1lo�ved; pro,vided, thai stach service is i� compliance u�ath apgii�able %deralp sta�e and rt�unicipa! regulatior�s. Offices of such use sha�I be Iimited to no rnore than twenty p�rcent {2o°/a) of the �oss floQr area of the building. kZ�r�ial stores. ..�;, Res�aurants, ca.�'es, tea rooms, �ave:ns, an- and of�,al� liquor. 1 i'a,� ��rmir�als, starads and o�'i�es. (Ord. �59, ?mZ7�gg) R�L1fl3934 r�uz�s��.7 ,\ ., �\� �l � rt \ , �`� =7 SE�'�'iON 2. Titie 11 I4.44, subd. 8 of the Mounds View Z�ning Code is ameraded �o read: f Subd. �. T ° , Iviotor �Iehicle and Re�reation E�u°rpmem S�Ies and Crara�es Accessor�r Th�r�tb pravided that: � a. Mator vehicle sales shatl be or� one �ot or contiguous lots not separated by a p�abiic street, a11ey or other use. � � � b. ✓ �. ✓d. The mii�imum lot widih shall be I50 fe�t at the minimum requ�red �ont yard setbacl� as de�ed i�x Seciian 1104.01, Yard Requirements for B-3 Zoriing Districts. A m��t�,r,um lot area of two (2) a�r�s is required. Setbacks shall be as required in Sectior� 1104.01, Yard Requiremenis for �-3 Zoning Districts. ,�e. °�he ent�r� site on which mator vehicie sal�s is locaied, other than iI1at - devoied ta buildangs and struct�res or la.ndscaped areas shall be surfaced and maFntained with a materiai to control dust, drait�a�e arid erosion which is subje�t t� the approval of the I7irector of Public Works/Ci�.y En�neer. ) �'f. A drainage system, subject to the approval of �h� ]�irector of Pea�lic Works/City Engneer, shall be instaIled and ma.intazned. All Provisions shall apply as inciuded in Chapters IIQJ, iQ10 and i302 relating to Surface Water Management. J g. The %llowin� parking requirements shall be met: � z�cr��9�� ?�iIi2S-�47 (1} (2} t; ) �li customer and employer par.kin� spac�s shail be permanently and clearly markesi. For every three (3} employe°s, a minimum oi fiwo (2) employe� parkiaa� spaces shafi be provided. A mitwnurn of two (2) off stre�t parking spacvs for each s�rvice stall aze required. �. 'I`�ie fore�ving r�quared parl�� spacvs shall b� sh�wn and desi�nated an the site plarg. �11 outdoor iliurrtination on sa�es iots shall b� provid�d wit� l�nses, r�f��c��r� or sh�es whYCh will concentrate the tf�ht upon the premis�s so as to prevex�t � 4 glare or direct rays aaid shaII be in compIianc� with Section I 103.09 of the Ivlunici�al Code. . ✓�i.^,.� The ma�mum ar� per�aitted for outside storag� oi motor v� cles cari not �cceed two (2) square f�et of outsid� storage to each one (1} sqe�are foot of encIosed �round floar area. %Tot more �han or�e (1) a.ut�mobile shall be stared on each 40 square feet of ot�tside storag�. N'o r�oftop �arking shall be permit�ed. �}. A�cessory buaidir�gs tn be used-soleiy for sales offices shall no# be permitted. Such accessory buildings as are peamitted shall be constnact�d of ihe sarn� mai�rials as the maan structure. ✓ k. � l. - - ;� J r�. "' ?3 � ne �% �o. -- � `� F• �q �/ r. All sigi�ing and informatio�al or v°rsual commurucatian de�c�s shall b� ia cornpliarice vv�v�th the Chapter 1008.08 of the Sign Code regulations. A minimum 10% of ih� property, excIudin� s�tback requirements, is requued for .l�ndscaped greenspa�e. The planang pian and rype of shrubbe�y shall require agprov�i af the Plarmin� Commission b�sed upon a. recommendation of City �'or�ster. A na�ara.i screen shatl be e: ected and mai�tained alon� all praperty lines separatin� ihe site from any residential district. The screenin� sha.11 include ]andscaging (trees, shrubs, �°ass, etc.) oi a type (Iayaut, species, heigh�, siz� and density) in comgliance with subdivisions 1�I9�.08 of the T�tie. ihe hours of operation of ttie faccYl'i� sha.11 not e�ceed 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. T�st dzivin� routes a.nd pattems must be submatted and approved prior to operation of an automobiie sales Iot. No rnusic or advertisements will be allawed over pagin� system. f�,ll provisians shall apply a.s inciuded in Section l iQ�.D1 relatin� to noise within the City Code � All car lots sh�ll be brou„�hhi into conf'onnanc� within seven �7) years of the date ih�s ordinane� is effective. SECTTON 3. T'has ord`u7a�ce is e�eciive th�rty {30} days after publication. R��.d by th� City Cotancxl of the City of �iounds Vie`v or� tf2is �tead azid passed by th� City Council oi�iounds Vietiv this Fi��03�34 I�171� 5-47 ; day of -- - - � 1996. day of , 1996. \\� •\ `\. '\� � r. :::� i z��M ��6a . . � : ; � :.� ' ; .: �f� �I [�lK�' u.�l►i i�"�:��-�i/c��►�1 l�eeiia�� I)atee Staff Repo� bye Plar�ni�g Case F'i1e Nm.e C}ctober 9, 1996 Pamela 5heldoc�, Community Development I�irector 461-96, 463�96 Itequest: ° Tha applicant, Mounds View Assoc. LLP, is requesting a ,�' conditional use pernut for the joint use ofparking facilities and driveways as is allowed by Section 1 i21.15 of the Zoning Code. The a�plicant is also requesiing a variance in the required parking ratios for the Mounds View Shopping Center. Peti��0saea°a I,ocatiomo Pll� No. �orti�g/I�ared �Tsee . Appiaeable Itegulati�nsa Mounds V►ew Assoc. LLP 2535-2585 Highway 10 07-30-23-11-OOi9 B-4 Mounds View Square Shopping Center The regulations applicabie to these requests are stated and discussed under ihe analysis section oithis report. Attachmetai�: Zoning Map Planning Application Letter frorn Paster Enterprises dated Oc#ober 3, 1996 Site Plan (blueline print) �ackgrou��: The properiy where Mounds View Square Shopping Center is located was rezoned from B-I to B-3 in April, 1973 and the shopping center was built in 1974. Tn 19�9, the property owner ob�ained approvai for a rezoning from B-3 to B-4 and a conditionat use permit allowing the development of the Harde�'s Restaurant as a drive-thru convenience food restaurant. As part of this action, th� City Council approved the site plan with the provision of 503 parking spaces rather than the 537 parking 5paces requ�red by.the Zoning Code. In 1991, the properiy owner obtained a variance to reduce parking requirements by 26 spaces to allow the construction of trash dumpster enclasures. Present day staff is assurYring that fihere are 477 parlcing spaces on the property at this time. Counting from the site plan, there are 505 parking spaces not accounting for the 26 parking spaces lost when the trash dumpster enclosures were built. If they are taken into account, there are 479 parking spaces in the shopping center. Planning Commission Plaru�ing Case No. 461-96: Mounds View Square October 8, 1996 Page 2 According to ihe site pIan provided by the applicant, �/Iounds View Square has 102,275 square fee�. The applicant is proposing to add 5,000 additionat square feet to the main shopping center b�ilding, just south of Mario's Video, and to replace the twa existing, freestanding resiaurants with larger dinner house style restaurants each having up io 5,000 square feet. The existing �iardee's contains 3,750 square feet; fihe existing Bridgeman's Ice Cream Restaurant also contains 3,750 syuare feet. The net increase in square fooiage on the site would be 9,500 square feet. Expansion of the restaurants and the retail building would eliminate 23 parking spaces. The end result would be a shoppin� center with l l 1,�i5 square fee# and 454 parking spaces. The parking ratio provided, using Yhe gross square fooiage in the shopping center, would be one space per 246 square feet or 4.06 parking spaces per 1000 square feet of shopping center. Analysis: The firsi issue which needs to be addressed is what the parking requirements are for Mounds View Square, before discussing how they might be modified either through a variance in parking ratios or use of joint pari:ing facilities. The �oning Code inctudes a schedule of off street parking requiremenis based on types of uses. The chart below shows the amount of parking required if these ratios are applied to the uses in Mounds View Square. It also shows two other ways of caiculating parking requirements: using alternaiive parking ratios obtained from surveying other jurisdictions aceepting the existing parking count of 477 as covering the e�sting square footage and caiculating the additional parking spaces needed for only the net additional square footage Space #/LJser Retail Storage Dining Kitchen MaIU 1"otal Maintezzance/ Restrooms l:Bridgeman's 2400 1350 3750 2:Marios 7150 600 7750 3:Vacant iI500 2800 14300 4:Com Credit 475 450 925 �:Mimi Fabrics S 150 1400 9550 6:Nails 840 120 960 � Plamiing Comsnissian Planriing Case IVo. 461-96: Mounds View Square �ctober 8, 1996 Fage 3 Space #/User Retail Storage Dining Kitchen MaIU Total Maintenance/ Restrooms 7:Tanning 2370 500 �87p � ; 8:Snyders 8400 1735 �p�35 ; 9:Vacant 1800 400 2200 lO:Steakhouse 1800 800 2b00 11:Karate 1750 400 2150 12:Maint/RR 575 13:Cityside 1580 340 �920 14:Cost Cutters 770 b40 1410 1�:Pink Flower 1050 1330 23gp i > ��impie � 400 1230 1630 17:Vacant 1600 100� 2600 18:Vacant 1500 400 �90� 19:Vacant 800 200 l�00 20:Vacant 3820 lOb� 4880 21:Budget 9500 46d0 I41Q0 22:Hardees 2400 1350 3750 Mail 8700 � Existing Total 62005 16,645 8050 6060 9275 102,035 Revised Sq.Ft. with EYpansion � Subtract 4800 2700 Exist. Rest. Add New Rest. 4000 �000 �040 3960 & Retail :.:;:.,::: . . ,.,,: , � � :: � � � .#:x�.; � � .� ::: :: � � �:;: � :: �: �. :: : ;.:: ��:;� �:: � �: � � � ¢!�tf� +.� {¢� y',q�¢ t'°}(�� .f �: �: ;,::::;::.: �.::;.<,:�: A r.� ,{p y ,�° {� � : , �:: � ::::.:.. ; �� : t..::..:...:.......:... ::� �. .4;:::;::': � ..:� ��R"'Yv' r��_A�Yi: ....:f�.�?CY°f�,-�.�}�-1��. ,::; L� �?..i..?.� �.��.:... .... �� :�Y��:...:� •��::'•'.:':. _..�*j��✓ �.�� Sl .:..:...::. .... ��:24W�r�';;...IYd.Rir�?.'. . .:: .. :. :.:..... . . . . .. .... .:.;.:.:.:'�:.::...n..:. � ....:�:>::;.:.::� y] y°� [��^ . . � ... :: . ' ��:.:i:�:..':::::::: . . . -.:: ',, .T. �i�.S.�i.7 F.'i� : . ' �:: . . . - . .::: '" ' . ; . .-. . . . ' Pla�u�ing Commission `'� Plaavung Case No. 461-9b: Mounds View Square October 8, 1996 , Page 4 Planning Comumisszon Planning Case No, 461-96: Mounds View Squar� October 8, 1996 Page 5 The preceding chart shows that, if the ra#ios in the Zaning Code were applied to each of the cunent uses in Mounds View Square, the parking requirement would be 1035 paeking spaces. Previous approvals have allowed �he shopping center to operate with 477 parking spaces in place. If it is assumed that the existing shopping cenier has adequate parking with 477 spaces, and parlcing requirements are calculated only for the new square footage, the totat number of parking spaces needed would be 514 spaces. �taff considers fihe ratios required by the Zoning Code to be much higher than has been our past experience. Typical raiios foc retail space in municipal parking codes are between 4.0 and 5.0 spaces per 1000 square feet; and for storage space 1.0 spaces per 1000 square feet. Restaurants are between 80-IQO square feet for dinner house style resiaurants. ` Staff considers the rafios required by the Zoning Code to be much higher than has been our past experience, Ptease see the discussion in the staff report on page S-6. z Staff has omitted a ratio for siorage, since we have used 4.5 parking spaces per 1000 for retail space, If 4,0 parking spaces per 1000 were usec�, we would recommend 1 space per 1000 square feet of storage. Pianning Commisszon Planning Case No. 461-96: Mounds View Square - October S, 1996 Page 6 _. _ � _ _. _ . .;_.— __ _. _ , 3 . . . . . . . ....� s�;;., '`�� 4.0 and 5.0 spaces per 100� square feet; and for stora.ge space 1.0 spaces per 1000 squar� } fr� �' �.. fee�. lZestaurants are between 80-100 square feet for dinner house style restaurants. '� Staff conducted a survey of' some suburban communities in the Twin City area. These included : Crystal, Roseville, Mendota Heighfs, Maplewood, Woodbury and Coon Rapids. Typical ratios for retail space are 4, 5 to 5.0 per 1000. No one has ratios as high as 10 to I000 as does Mounds View. The one city using a square footage ratio for restaurants, Crystal, uses one space per b0 square feet without dividing between kitchen and dinin�. The chart above shows how the parking requirement wouid change if these ratios were applied to Mounds �liew Square. The number of parking spaces required would be range between 573 and 5�1, depending on whether the ratios are applied to all ofihe square footage or on[y to the new square %otage. The appiicant is proposing 454 spaces. The applicant has applied for a variance in the schedule of of� street parking requirements which would be appiied to this shopping center, and for a conditional use permit to allow the jaint use of parking facilities and driveways as is aIlowed by Section 1121.1� of the Zonin� Code. The remainder of this report anaiyzes these two requests to determine if adequate parking is availabie to aliow the additional square footage requested by the >:� applicant. i�caa�zat�ce in Parkin� Ratios (Planning Case 1lTo. 463-96) The criteria for granting of variances are stated in Section 1125.02 Subd. 2 and noted below along with sta.ff comments. a. Exceptional or extraoedinary circumstances apply to the property which do not apply generaily to other properties in the same zone or vicinity and result from lot size of shape, topography or other circumstar►ces over which the owners of'the propecty since the effective date hereof have had no controi. c. That the special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the appiicant. Mounds View Square is the largest shopping center in Mounds View, and it is in this shopping center that the efFec� of a higher-than-typical parking raiio, established by the City, has its greatest effect. The shopping center has been operating successfully at a much lower ratio (4.b7 spaces per 1Q00 gross squar� feet) than is required far retai� space in the City's parking regulations (10 spaces per 1000 square feet). A parlcing demand study completed in 1989 by Benshoof and Associates ceported that the Urban Land Tnstitute performed inWdepth research on a combined totai of approximately 1 i0 shopping centers. (This study is a part of tl�e file on the rezor�ing for Hardee's Restaurant.) This `''� research showed that a parking ratio of 4.0 spaces per 1000 square feet is adequate for all Pianning Commission Planning Cas� No. 461-96: Mounds View Square October 8, 1996 Page 7 but the .busiest 19 hours of th� year. The applicant nas noi caused the multipiier effect o� a higher-than-typical parking ratio on the size of his shopping cenier. The development of dinner house style restaurants is noi anticipated by the parking regulations which require one parking space %r every 40 square feet of dining area and one paricing space for every 80 square %et of kitchen. TypicaI ratios for dinner house restaurants are one space for every 80 square feei o� gross square footage, to recognize the slow�r turnover of customers. e. That the variance requested is the minimum variance which would �ileviate the hardship. Ecoe�omic conditions alone shall not be considered a hardship. The parking ratios �or retaii square footage in the Mounds View Zoning Code create an excessive requirement for shopping centers of this size. The City's parkin� ratio at one space per 100 feet is more thar� twice the ratio used in other nearby jurisdictions, and when applied to a shopping center of over 140,000 square feet, creaies a burder�socne requirernent. The more typicat requirement is 4.0 tl 5.0 spaces per 1000 square feet. A1lowing the use of 4.5 spaces per 10a0 square �eet for retaii space is the minimum variance needed to address the hardship. The parking ratios for restaurants also create an excessive requirement for dinner house style restauranis, since these restaurants have a slower t�rnover of custocners. The minimum adjustment needed in parking ratios for dinner house style restauraxrts is to require one parking space for each �0 square feet of gross flaor area. b. The IiteraI interpretation af the provisions of this Titte would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this Title. d. That g�anting the variance requested will not con%r on the applieant any special privilege that is denied by this Titie to owners of other lands, structures or buildings in the same district. Qwners of shopping centers similar in size to Mounds View Square and of dinner house style restaurants would face ths same difficulty that the applicant is experiencing due io the higher-ihan-typical parking ratio for fhese uses in the Zoning Code. Using a ratio of 10 spaces per 1 �00 square feet for retait space, and 1 space per 40 sauare feet for dining space requires an excessive investment in parking which is especially acute with the shopping center of this size. f. The variance wouid not be materially detrimental to the gjupose of this Til-ie or [o other -. property in the same zone. g. The proposed variance wiil not impair an adeqnate supply of light and air to adjacent Planning Commission Plaruung Case No. 461-96 October 8, 1995 Page � Mounds View Squaee property or substantialIy increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safery or substantiallv diminish or impair properiy values. The existing shopping center contains 102,d35 sc}uare feet and has 477 parking spaces, or a ratio of 4.67 parking spaces per 1400 square feet. The applicant has nine shapping centers, of wl�ich four are in the same size range as Mounds View Square. The average parking ratio for these four centers is 4.72 parking spaces per 10�0 gross square feet regardless of use. The successful operation of these centers illustrates the fact that using a ratio of 4.5 spaces per I000 square feet for retait space is an appropriate ratio and will not be detrirr�ental to the purposes of the Zoning Code. LTse of a ra�io of 10 spaces per 1 d00 square feet is burdensome. The parking lot for Mounds View Square is oisufficient size, and the shapping center contains nighttime and daytime uses with offsetting parking demands thai no overflow parking or adverse ef�ect on adjacent properties is anticipated. The shopping centec is separated from surrounding �ases by streets. �i 5taff ltecorremendaiioaa: Favorabie to allowing a ratio of 4.5 spaces per 1000 square feet oinet retail space in Mounds View Square, with space in storage, mechanical rooms, rest rooins and the enclosed rnall excluded from parking calculatians. Favorable to allowing a <`'� ratio of I space per 80 feet of gross floor area in dinner house style restaurants. The parking ratio for fast food restaurants would remain at i space per 40 square feei in dining area and 1 space per SO square feet in kitchen space. If these ratios were applied to the proposed square footage in Mounds View Square, the parking requirement would be: � retail • dinner house restaurants • fast food s new retail • new sq.ft. in dinner house restaurants � reduction in fast food a base total spaces to be provided If calculated from scratch 299 150 124 573 454 If assuming a base o�477 18 150 188 477 457 454 If parking requirements are calculated using 477 as a base, then the applicant is within three spaces of having su�icient parking for the new uses added if credit is given for the square faoiage in restaurants being removed. Pianning Caminission Planning Case No. 46I-96: Mounds View Square October 8, 1996 Page 9 Staf�° lZecoanrnemdatfa�x on Parkie�g V��°�ancea Favorable, witli findings as noied above. Ir� pariicular, the City's parking ratios create a hardslup for shopping centers of this size, and the shapping center contains both nightiime and daytime uses which cause the parking demands to b� offset. Candiiional �Ise Pew�ait (Pla�arai�a� �'ase liTO. 46X-96) SecYion 1121.15 allows parking requirements to be adjusted, with approval of a conditiona.l use permit, where fihere are two or more uses located on the same property which have offsetting parking demands, i.e. ceriain uses are primarily daytime uses and other uses are primarily nighttime or Sunday uses. iJses Iisted as primarily daytime uses are: banks, business offices, retail stores, personal service shops, household equipmemt or furniture shops, clothing ar shoe repair or service shops, manufacturing, wholesale and similar uses. Uses listed as primarily nighttime oe° Sunday uses incl�ade: auditoriums incidental to a public or parochiai school, churches, bowling alley, dance hail, theaters, bar or restaurant. Section 1121.15 allows 50% af the off-street parking facilities needed for nighttime and Sunday uses to be provided by the parking provided for daytime uses, and 50% of the off street parking facilities needed for daytime uses tio be provided by the parking provided for nighttime and Sunday uses. Mounds View �quare includes both types of uses. Sta.ff has. calculated how the use of joint parking wouid affect the parkin� spaces required, using the parking ratios from the I�lounds View Zoning Code and also the more typical ratios noted in the earIier chart. The resuli is as follows: i�- �. � �. �� Planning Commission Planziing Case No. 461-96: Mounds View Square October 8, 1996 Page 10 Mounds View Parking Ratios Alternative Parking Ratios Parking from Parking frorrt Parking from Parking from Daytime Uses Nighttime Uses Dayiime Uses Nighttime Uses # of Spaces 660 375 299 274 Required (from scratch} Less 50% af 330 188 150 13i Requirement (maxin�um reduction as per 1121,15} Total Parking Required 5 i 8 411 with Reduction By what percentage N/A; cannot reach 454 through 20.8% does total required reductian for joini parking facilities need to be reduced to if parking ratios in Zoning Code are reach # praposed to be used and variance is not granted. provided by applicant: 454 spaces The chart indicates thai, if the parking ratios in the Zoning Code are used, the applicant has not provided enough parking even if the ma.ximum reduciion allowed by the ordinance is given for joini use of parking facilities. However, if a more realistic ratio is used for retail space and dinner house styie restaurants, then a 21% reduction if parking requirements for nighttime and daytime uses, because the parking demand will be offset will be enough to match the parking proposed to be provided by the applicant. When the net square foota�e in the shopping center, less the mail, the mechanicat room and rest roo�ns, is compared to the pariting count provided, the overali ratio is 4.44 parking spaces per 1,400 sq.ft. The Zoning Code inclucfes conditions required for joint use of parking facilities (see Section 1121.15 Subd. l.b.{6}{a) -(c). These are noted beiow with staff's comments. (a) The building or use for which application is being made to utilize the off-streei parking facilities provided by another building or use shall be tocated within three hundred feet {300') of such parking facilities and not separated by a puhiic way. \ Pianning Commission ,� Planning Case No. 461-96: Mounds View Square October 8, 1996 Page 11 All of the uses proposed as part of this joint parking arrangement are also part of a coordinated shopping center, Because of th� distribution of retail space and the parking, it is feasible for custorrters to find parking within 3�0 feet of their destination. 5taffwould suggest that a condition be included in any approval which would requir� employees to park in spaces behind the main retail building, to assure that the maximum parking is available for customers. (b) The applicant shall show tY�at there is not substantiai conflict in the principal operating hours of the two (2} buildings or uses for which joint use of off-street parking facilities is proposed. The Zoning Code acknotivledges that restaurants ar� primarily nighttime uses, and retail businesses are primarily d�ytime uses. It should also be noted that, because of its size and the variety of tenanfis, custo9ners at Mounds �Iiew Square would be expected to combine trips and use several dif�erent businesses. An alIowance for some overlap in parking requirements is logical in a shopping center of this size. (c) A properEy draw� iegal insti�umen�, executed by fhe parties concerned for joint use of off- ,'.l street parkitxg faciIities, duly approved as to form and manner of execution by the City Attorney, shaii be filed with tl�e City Clerk-Administrator and recorded with the Register of Deeds, Ramsey County. Staffwould recommend that joint parkir�g and access easEments be recorded against the property for the benefit oiall tenants prior to any devetopmen� reviews being approved or building permits being issued for the proposed expansion or the dinner house restaurants, as a condition of approval. � Sta� Iteco�me�acfat�os� o� �oncf�taonal [Tse Permit: Favorabie, allowing for joint use of parking faciiities between uses in Mounds Vi�w Squaee such that the number of parking spaces required is 454. cc: Joi�r�. Streeter, Paster Enterprises, 2227 University Avenue, St. Paul MN 55114�1677 F�: 646-13 89 r�erv — - K�,au Q , 788 p 7841 �'Q 7g 7895 �'9 7890 7885 "' � N fY N �`7 N 7876 Z 7883 78fiG 7857 787fl 'g6g � 7877 7854 7�SE 7880 7885 7970 � ,Q 7863 7$4 �8�g 7850 78�5 ��2 y� 7B51 783� O 784a 7835 �30.� 7ez ° 7eis ,� ) � 76t5 779Q "+ � �ier 781 N � 7805 01 ��r 78atl � 7809 7770 � 780t '��Z �a� g{m� 780i w�` 7751 ^. �� 77fi7 r�6a � rra�i `L 77s1 7750 T131 7755 7730 7721 ^�2h 7745 7710 TI t t 77t5 N m � I� v�i __��:�:;':::::: R_Z Vicinity Map -=9 Planning Case Nos 4b1-96, 463-96 � Mounds View Square Parlcing Rati_os o :c ::• oo i O \- �-'�' � . �� q 7864 8 n �n ::: �°n �°n 8� '�T '� ° PF o *�^ �i n CI fY :.: l^I N %�89 %�H N (V N N N (4 7�2 7853 7878 7875 78& 7889 7860 O�Cr .,�� 7855 561. I w � -- 784fi � 7845 7840 7829 78�0 �817 7808 7780 7801 776Q 7797 ��Q na� � �� 77b7 7730 7753 T/20 7'700 � 7881 785 � 7857 7847 is � �� 7833 783 7837 78t5 7827 7814 7817 7807 780 7749 T15 7807 7°739 7740 T75t< T729 7730 7749. 7'719 772 , 77311 na t �� c T/15 n m � a °r � TIO1 N N co �� n N N S ss. �� " f, 1 �� ,� "►; � __ _ `� � � ►: .� * AP��C.q1V`r: Pas�ez Enterprises dba. ' � Mounds View Assoc �LP �� 646�7901 ;��. 2227 University Avenue, St. Paul MN 55114-1677 FAX: 64b-1389 S�� Addre�, �iiy, St�x�, and �� C�de `� fe�ieeest irr Pro�erty � � � � .� (c#a�ck apprvprtat� b�x�: Ovaner o� Praperty . Ca�tr�et for. �eed Ov�er L�esse�, Operator, b9artage� Agreemar� ta Purcnase �ti�er {e.�cptainj � �cwree� eviden� af appf�artt'S irrt�ese irt �� p�oo�rty m�y bo r�qbair�d hetare final C:t�+ �er af fttis reoe� P9�PE�iY INV�L�/ED: Address/G�ner� LoCa�� 2535-2585 Ha.ghway L0, Mounds View MN SS1I2 L_°ga1 Des�;iption or Proper� 1�enti�r��iar� l�umber L°�a1 Qv,er��r: Name/Address �resent U�� (cnec:c apgrapriage bax): Current Zoning: B-4 � tJe�deve(abc-d/Vacant _ _ _. , Q Sirrgfe t=amiIy Dwe�ling - Q _ DualexfTv�a Family Dwei[ing --.... _.. _ .._ ,. ...; .:_� - . _: �-- --.--_.�T�_,.----� :. :.-: ..-- ._._. C� Mul�-�acniiy (Na. af l.lniis ) � Busia�esslC�mmerc;al Esza�iisa�ment [7 fndusttia� �^ianlisttrnent Q Ottter {expl�it�) Prop�eiy C�ass'm`catian: [ Abstrac� � Torrer�s R�'�U�jT: onditional Use Permi� ta a1low 'oint use of arkin (Section 1121ai5) 2) Variance in number of parking spaces required based on revised parking ratios from those in Zoning Code. (Section I12I.13) 3 Variance in si n re ulations for shopping center i.dentificatian sign (SecCion lOQ8e08) "°!�ase nc�te: AQptic�m may be rescQns,cfe i�r aacirianat fees assoc:�r� ��viiit ihe rewiew cr this r�u�st ( H�: tE�Y D�r�FiE TH,4i Tf ;E ,��CVE S�.��r��T ,4R� °%tUE. �z.oning Vs�r�ca C xsaitior�t CJs� r��cmi� C�e ,�pa�1 �avaiaa.lS�t� Pls� Fi�vi�v 1�4inor Sua�oevisson .�9�tar SuoQiviseon arno. ?f�n .�m�drsr�+�c � +c : e�tand PJter�a� P�rg 'Nedaria 3urte� ��i� r�!nnn�rtg Sign PgJ� ?U[� Arnea�dm��e 52iAlaer�. rrtrnimucn S4QQ. rna�aanurr� S1.pDD f�1 t� r'�2 - Sr 5. ,ti! crspt�s �CQ r"i-i � R-2 - �'r. �I o�er� ��0 a''7� Si C}Q/acre. ;ninimurrt 1 �Q. ;rrsadrnua� ��1 S°E 54 52�� piu� ai�8 daoosiY S�Ca �0 nius dao��i damrmrn�a �y Stffif $t0 S5Q ��B 5� � 0� ar fira�l �,axr � �p / - �(� AAP90V�� ; OE4{�� i.��L�.� '. m �-/o� -�/n /,,, R� �an� ��ic�an � @� r�� eaiot Num�r ToBa! � P�id Oate ?� F.��ioc Numc�r �ldditianai �e� ��id i1at,� P� r"�aioe Numb�r t?ax� �- v� � -�1 CG �s4.�...�.A ,4..... ��_ . .. . . ' 11 il :�11,1�_ - � , DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT OF SHOPPING CENTERS 2227 University Avc. � St. Paul, MN 55114-1677 • 612-646-79a1 • Fa� 612-646-1389_ OCt01?�C �, � �� CENTRAL PLAZA =�Sth & CentraI Ave. N.E. Minneapolis, Minnesota �S. PaP112E8 Sfi@�(�011 Comrr►unity Development Direcfiar City of Niounds Vievv CRYSTAL SNaPPING CENTER 2401 Highway 't Q Bass Lake Road & West Broadway c�y.scai, Minnesota il�ounds Vievv, Mi�l. 55112 Re: Parking Variance Request #or Restaurant and shopping center additions at Moundsview Square Shopping DODDWAY SHOPPING CENTEi2 Center. Smith & Dodd Road Wesi St. Paul, 1�(inneso[a D�ar Ms. SheEdon, LEXINGTONPLAZASHOPPES 1/1/@ 8fe requesting from the City of ii�ounds Viev�r a parking Lexington tic Larpenteur variance of 4.25 arking spaces per 1000 Square feet of Rosevitle, Minnesota Q shopping center and free-standing buildings. This wiii allow for the expansion of the free-standing restaurants {2535 �a 2585 Highway 10}, and a 5,000 sc�uare foof addition to the vIENDOTA PLAZA shopping centere The attached plan shows the location ar�d State Hwy. 110 & Dodd Road SiZB Of fi� eX ansion areas. Mendota Heights, Minnesota � A. Moundsview Sq�tare feefs that the current par#cing code for a shopging center district is to restrictive. !n our Mou�vnsvi�w sQua,xE experience of shopping center devefopment a 4.25 ratio HWy. �o � L°"g�.ak� �°aa wifl be su#ficient for a community center of this size. Mounds View, Minnesota I'aster Enterprises manages nine shopping c�nters in the metropolitan area. in these centers the parking ratio per t�oRT�w,aYSr�o�Q�NGCEr��R one thousand square feet ranges from 3.fi3 to 6.16 Sta�e Hwy. 23 & Woodland Wl�ii 8f1 8V@fa @ Of 4.$, T�"I@ 4.�5 fat(O �i18t iS Circle Pines, �v[innesota g requested fa(Is within this range. SIBLEY PLAZA West 7th Street & Davern St. Paul, Minnesota SOUTHV[EW SHOPPfIVG CE�ITER Southview Slvd. & l3th Ave. S South 5t. Paul, iv[innesota The shoppir�g center's shared parking among a number af tenants reduces the effective parking raiio. For instance, a single use site musf ineet the peak parking demand of that individual business. In a shopping center with multipie uses the peak demands of the tenants com� at different times, thus lowering the overall parking requirement of fhe center. � DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT OF SHOPPING CENTERS 2227 University Ave. � St. P�ol, MN 55] (4-1677 � 612-646-790t • F�.r bI2-G46-1389 °�he addition of the pedestrian bridge vvilE block the CENTRAL PLAZA visibility and damage the identity of t�e �hopping center =l5th & Central Ave. N.E. Minneapolis, Minnesota �enaCltS. The expansion of the free-standing lacations and the shopping.center will allow �his obstructied site to have a greater visuai impact and a s�ranger commerciai positian at this location. CRYSTAL SHOPPiNG CENTER Bass Lake Road & West Broadway Crystal, Minnesota DQDDWAY SHOPPING CENTER Smith & Dodd €ioad bVest St. Paul, Minneso[a LEXINGTON PLAZA SHOPPES Lexington � Larpenfeur Roseville, V(innesota MENDOTAPLAZA 5tate Hwy. 110 & �odd Road Mendota F�eights, Minnesota YtOUNDSVIEW SQ(1ARE Hwy. l0 � Long Lake Road �[ounds View, ,�Iinnesota NORTHWAY SHOPP(NG CENTER State [Ewy. 23 3c Woodland Cirde Pines, ,�finnesota SfBLEY PLr�ZA West 7ti� Street & Davern St. Paul, i�Ein�esota iOUTHVIEW SHOPPING CEN"iER Southview Blvd. & 13th Ave. S � Soutli S[. P.�ut, Minnesota �. The addition of the pedestrian bridge is depriving ��e applicant of visibility and identity which are very important in a commerciai site of this size. Oth�r commercial locatians in the City of �/iounds View will not be directly ef�ected. C. The addition of the Highway 10 obstr�sction has no� been caused by the activity o# th� h/lounds View Square Shopping Center. D. ihe granting of a parking variance that will allow for the buiiding �xpansions wifl not effect ather commerciai properti�s in the Ci�y of tl�ounds View. Th� parking spaces of the free-standing restaurants and the shopping center are shared parking as a combined site. The free-standing buifdings cannat be iimited to ihe imrnediate adjacent parking as in a singfe use commercial locatiar�. �. The parking variance its�lf will have a small impact on the overail parking in the shopping center. However, the ability to expand the free-standing restaurants will enable the shopping center to at�ract larger and more stable tenants that will be less concerned with a highway obstruc�ion. �. A parking variance will not be detrimentai to other commerciai tenants or residents in the Cifiy of f�o�ands View. G. The parking variance wilf not ch�nge the traffic #low or the traffic patterns in the shopping center. All of the access, egress, and drive isles will rernain the same. ihe varia�ce wiE( not change traffic or effect the air or light in any adjacent properties. � DEVELOPNIENT AND MANAGEMENT OF SHOPPING CENTERS 2227 University Ave, a St. Pnal, MN 55114-i677 • 612-646-7901 - Fax 612-646-1359 ', CENTRAL PLAZA Sincereiy yours, 45th & Centrat Ave. N.E. Minneapolis, Minnesota �nou�i�sui��n/ sQU,�R� �ssoct��r�s, ��P CRYSTAL SHOPPIiVG C�NTER %� % / j��'�� 8ass Lake Road & West Broadway �� '� Crystai, Minnesota John H. Streeter Construc�ion iVianager DODDWAY SHOPPING CENTER �J�S/j�g Smith & Dodci Road West 5t. Pau{, IvEinncsota �nclosure LBXINGTON PLAZA SH�PPES Lexington & Larpenteur Roseville, Minnesota VIENDOTA PLAZA State Hwy. 110 & Dndd Road Nfendo[a Heiohts, Minnesota MOCINDSVIEW SQUARE Hwy, f0 & Long L�kc Road Mounds View, V1ini�esota NORTHWAY SHQPPiIVG CENTER 5tate Htvv. 23 & Woodland Circle Pines, c�Iinnesvta 51BLEY PLAZA West 7th S[reet Sc D�vern 5t. Paul, Y(innesota SOC3THVI�W SHOPPfNG C�VTER Suutfzvie�v Blvd, & 13th Ave. S S�iath St, P�ul, Minnesota I�em #5 , . � f :':: ' : �< ' .� ; `. 1 `,� �<_ ;: +; , Nleetfn� Datt: Staf� Repoe-� byo Plan�ing Ca�e Fife No.o Requesto Pef6iior�er: I�o�ataor�o P� Noa Zoning/I.,a�d �Tsea October 9, 1996 Pamela Sheldon, Cornmuniiy Development I�irector 4b0-96 Approval of a conditional use permit to allov� auto re�air, Ron Qstrander and Bnace MacI�onald 2975 Hi�hway 10 06�30-23g23-0005 Bd3 The property has an existing structure which was used by Auto Central %r used car sates. Applicable �t��ula�ions: The B-3 districi ailows for minor auto repair provided the criieria stated in Section 1114.04. Subd 3 are mei. These criteria are listed and discussed in the analysis section of this report. Attaet�ments: Planning Application Zoning Map Diagram of Buildings on Property {from aerial photos) Excerpt from IViaunds View 2000 �aci��r�und: The applicants, Ron Ostrander and Bruce MacDonald have applied %r a conditionaI use permit to altow an auto repair business to be established at 2975 Highway 10. This property is in ihe B-3 district which allows minor auto repair with approval of a conditional use permii. The properry is more-or-less triangular in shape, coniains .63 acres and is bordered on the south side by Highway 10 axld the east side by Spring Lake Road. Th�; properties to the north and west are zoned R-2 and are developed with duplexes. There is a fence along part af the easi and north properky lir�e which is in poor repair. There are three light standards in the parlcii�g tot, and a pylon sign. Mr. Ostrander has described the types of services proposed to be offered as inciuding the foilowing: oil changes, tune�ups, muf#Ier and brake repair, replacemeni of parts, engine repair, and general servicing of vehicles. They do not intend ta pull or rebuild engines, do body work or painting. The types of services will be similar to Amoco Insta-Lube. Planning Commission Planning Case No. 460-96 October 9, 1996 Page 2 2975 Highway 10 The applicants are proposing ta use the e�sting building and parking lot on �he property, No building expansion is planned. There are two service bays anc� a waiting area in the existing building. They intend to paint the building, seal coat the parking lot, fix the fences and lighting standards. 1Vo additionat landscaping is proposed other than plaaters in the parking loi. The applica�i has not provided a site plan since they did noi anticipate any changes in either the site layout or landscaping. In i 994, the Planning Commission recommended approval of, and the City Council granted a conditional use permit to Auto Central %r minor aufio repair at this location. (Pianning Ca.se No. 379-94) A��lysis/ 13eco�remendatiose: The Zoning Code defines minor automobile repair as: "Minor repairs, including body and fender work, minor painting and upholstering service, replacement of parts and engine service to passenger vehicles and trucks not exceeding a one ton chassis design." (1102.02 Subd. 6) The description of services proposed by the appticant fits this definition and wouId be allowed under the B-3 district with approval of a conditiona� use permit. There are two sets of criteria which a.re to be used in evaluating this appiication. The first set are Iisted in the B-3 districi and apply to rr�nor auto repair businesses (�ection 11 I4.04 Subd. 3). The criteria for granting of conditional use permits are listed in Section 1125.01 Subd. 3. These criteria are discussed below, and have been grouped by issue where appropriate. I.ot Area d. A miv►imiun lot area of fiwenty h�vo thousand five hundred (22,500) square feet and miz�imum lot dinrAensions of one hundred fifty feet by one hundred thirty feet ( I50' ;x 130') be provzded. The lot has 2i,442.� square feet, and has lot dimensions as follows: North: 158 feei East: 371 feet 5outh: 213 feet West: 90 feet Planning Commission ' Planning Case No. 46d-96: 2975 Highway 10 October 9, 1996 1'age 3 ��elcia�� a�acl S�ie Desaga� b. The architectural appearacace and functional plan of the building and site shall not be so dissimilar to the existing buildings or area as to cause impairment in property va3ues or consiitute a biighting infiuence within a reasonable distance of the lot. c. The entire site, other than that taken up by a buiiding, structure or plantings, shall be surfaced with a materiat to control dust, drainage and erosion which is subject to the approval of the Director of Public Works/Cily Engineer. f. A curb not less than six inches (6"} above grade shall separate the public sidewaik from motor vehicle service areas. At the boundaries of a residential disirict, a strip of not less than ten feet (10') shall be Iandscaped and screened in compliance with subdivisions l I03.08 (1) tbrough (5) of this Title. • The applicants are proposing to use the existing building, and to upgrade the condition of '� ihe building and the site. The curreni state of the property is somewhat blighted and the proposed changes will be an improvement. The site area wh.ich is noi occupied by the building or by vegetation is in an asphalt parking Iot which the applicants are proposing to seal coaY. The current condition of the parking lot is poor. There is no curbing around the perimeter of thg parking lot. Chapter 1 I21 of the Zoning Code requires a perimeter curb barrier around parking lots which serve uses other than single-£amiiy and two-family residences and townhouses. Staff is recommenditig a contingency that curbing be installed on this site to t�etter define the parking area, improve the site, and bring the site into cotnpliance with the Code. There are no public sidewalks along Highway 10 or Spring Lake Road, and therefore item f, above does not apgly. The site is bordered oe� the north and west by property in the R-2 district. There are h�vo single family homes across Spring Lake Road to the east. .There is an existing fence, which is in very poor repair atong the west property line and a portion of the north and east property lines. 5taffis recommending that this fence repaired and repainted, or replaced and that it be e�ctended aIong the entire peoperty line bordering the properties in the R-2 districfi. The fence is ❑eeded in order foz' the site to comply with ihe requirement for screening irom residentiai properties. The area in vegetation along the north proper.ry line varies from agproximately 15 feet to 25 feet, along the rear of ihe building. The Eand area in vegetation along the remainder of the north property tine and the west praperty line is extensive. The site is not landscaped beyond mown grass. The City does not have a specific requireznent for a certain amoun� of trees or shz�abs in iandscaped areas. The Planning Commission may want to Plannin� Commission -`��, Plannin� Case No. 460.9b: 2975 Higiaway 10 4ctober 9, 1996 P�ge 4 recommend ihe p1a�i�ng of irees and/or shr�abs as a requiremer�t oithe conditionai use pernut. I��gh#i�g and �igna�e g. The lighiing shall be accomplished in such a way as io have no direct source of light visibie froen adjacent land in residential use or frotn the public right-of-wa� and shall be in compliance with Section 1103.09 of this Tikle. • lighting arranged to deflect light away from adjoining residential zone or from puhlic streets e hooded or controlled so as not to light adjacent property • light cast on public street shall not exceed 1 foot-candIe; on residential property shall not exceed 0.4 foot candle. Each light standard island and all islands in the pazking lot shall ba landscaped or covered. m. All signing and informationai or visual cornmunication devices shall be rninimized and shall be in compliance with the Mounds View Sign. Code. . There are three existing light standards in the parking lot which are in poor repair, and two of them are located in the parking Iot rather than in landscaped islands. Because they are not in use, staffwas unable to tell if they create glare onto adjacent properties. Given that this is an existing site with light standards in place, staff is seeking guidanc� from the Pianning Commission as to how much fik�e applicani is expected to do to meet these criteria. In order to meet the criteria, the luminaires on the light standards may need to be replaced and landscaped islands created . Staff needs photometric readings for the e�sting light. standards io determine if they meet the limits on foot candles noted above. The applicant is proposing to use a sign package provided by the "parent" campany. Staff is recomrnending the appiicant provide information on signage prior to the Planning Com.mission's next meeting. Signage is limited to a total area of 100 square feet, including'any ground or waIl signs. , I)a°�ina�e e. A dr�inage system, subject to the approval of the Director of Public Works/Cii.y Engineer, shall be instaiied. • The Ciiy Engineer has reviewed the proposaI and has noted that the drainage will �o to the ditch along the �-Iighway 10 right-of-way. They ha,ve advised that the case be referred io MnDOT and the Rice Creek V�afiershed District to verify that they do not have any planning Commission Planning Case No. �60�96 October 9, 1996 Page 5 � �� ° �� '�r° � 5�1 �� t��s� t� „�.i yi/,. �k �.� r � �� ,� �� -�re� 2975 Highvvay 10 special condit�o;�s. Siaiiwill make these referrals prior to the Planning Commission's neact meeting. The City Engineer has also noted that this site was a gas station, and it would be advisable to get iriformation on whether the underg�-o�nd tanlcs bave been properly removed. �u�aio�e- S�orage9 Sales and Se�wace k. �a Parking or car magazine storag� space shalI be screened from view of abutiing residentia[ districts in compliance with subdivisions 1103:�8 {1) through (5} of Yhis Title. No outside storage except as allowed in compliance with subdivisiozt 4 of this Section shall exist. � ai'ea is fenced and screened frocn view of neighboring uses; if abuiting a residential disteict, fencing and screening in accordance with Secfion 1103.0� � storage is screened from view from public right of way � siorage area is grassed or scarfaced to control dust � all lighting hooded, directed so light source shall not be visible from the public right of way or frorn neighboring residences e shall not take up required packing spaces p. No outside sale or service except as allowed in compliance witI-t subdivision 5 of this Section shall e�st. � iimited fio thirty percent (30%) of gross flaor area of principal use 0 fenced or screened from view of neighboring residentiai uses or any abutting residential district; fencing and screening in accordance wiih Section 1103.08 a saene as o. above The appticant has not indica�ed whether they expect io have outdoor storage on the site, and more information is needed on this iterrz. Staff wouid recommend that, if outdoor storage is permitted, that it be limited to the area behind the building and that it be enclosed with a soIid Fence or wall. A location for a trash duznpster and enciosure needs to be specified for the site. Staff recommends a requirement that any repair work be done within the building, no� outside, and cars not permiiied to be parked outside in a dismantled siate. � �Togse n. Provisions are made to control and reduce noise. The building is made of concrete block, and solid walls face the properties in the residential district ta th� easi, north and �west. The bay doors face Highway 10. The orientaiion of the buildin� will dir�ct any noise toward the highway and away from the � a, Planning Commission Plai�ning Case No. 460-96: 2975 Highway 10 October 9, 1996 1'age 6 residences. The types of'repairs wili not create excessive noise. The applicant expects business hours will be �:00 to 6:00 Monday through Saturday. They wili be closed on Sundays. Ac�ess Vehicuiar access points shall create a mitiirnum of conflict witta throvgh traffic movement, shalt comply with Chapter 1121 of this Title and shall be subject to the approval of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. At present, there is a wide swath of asphalt where the parking lot on the site meets Spring Lake Road, with no defined driveway entrance. There is a driveway from the parking lot onto Highway 10. The Zoning Code limits the �width of curb cuts io 30 feet for properties in the B-3 district, ��aff recommends that the driveway or�to Highway 10 be eliminated, and a defined driveway entrance from Spcing Lake Road, no more than 34 feet in width, be created. As is noted earlier, we are also recammending that curbing be instalied atong the edge of the parking lot. When this curbing is done, it could also be used to define ihe driveway entrance and the excess asphalt removeri. The grass border around the sife should be extended along Spring Lake Road on either side of the defined cfriveway entrance. Parking requirements for this use are at least 4 off-street parking spaces plus 2 off-street parking spaces for each service stall. This site would require eight spaces. More than adequafie room is availabie for these eight spaces. Pro�is�oras Not Applicable to 'I"I�is Propos�l h. Whenever fuel pumps are to be instatled, purnp isiands shail be installed, C�°ateria %r Approval of C'ortditiotaal Use Permits (�ectiora 1125.01 Stabd. 3) ( I} The use will not create an excessive burden oa existing parks, schools, streets and other public facilities and utilities wluch serve or are proposed to serve the area. The siie i�as been used for a commercial business in ihe past and is served by an existing arterial highway and collector street, such thaY trafF�ic can access the site without going through the adjacenf residential neighborhood. The site is served by utilities. Because the proposai is for a business, no burden on parics or schools is aniicipated. (2} The use will be sufficiently compatible or separaEed by distance or screening frorn adjacent residentially zoned or used land so that eacisting homes will not be depreciated in value and there will be not dekerrence to deveiopment af vacant land. �, I I Pianning Commission Planning Case No. 4b0-96: 2975 Highway 10 Ocfober 9, 199b F'age 7 The sit� needs to be bordered on the east, north anci west by a fence and a. buffec strip of landscaping ai least 10 feeY in width to meet #l�is requiremeni. The existin� fence needs to be repaired and repainted, or repIaced and gaps filIed to be adequate. There is adequate roo�n to provide the required buffer strip. (3} The struciure and site will have an appearance that will nat l�ave an adverse effect t�pon adjacent residential properties. The curreni state ofihis site has an adverse effect upon adjacent residentiai properties, and the improvemen�s proposed by the appiicant vvill reverse fhis situation. Staff recommends ihat coczditions h� included on ihe conditionai use perm.it wkvch assure that these improveznents are made. (4} � The use, in the apinion of the [Planning Commission], is reasonably reIated to the overall needs of the City and to the existing land use. The reopening of this business, and the improvements to the site, wilI help in st�°engthening :; the vitaIzty and enhancing the appearance of the Highway 10 corridor, This corridor is very important to the iong run economic health of the City. (5) The use is consistent with the purposes of the Zotting Code and the purposes of the zoning district in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use. The puz-pose of the B-3 district is to provide for and Iimit the establishment of motor vehicle oriented or dependent commercial and service activ.ities. It allows for auto repair businesses with approval of a conditional use permit. The applicant's proposal fits within the limits envisioned by the ordinance %r the B-3 districi, and its location along Highway 10 is iogical and apprapriate. (6) The use is noi i� conflict with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. The most recent discussion of comprehensive goals for the City was ihe Mounds View 2000 project in 1994. The Vision Statement from the Growth, Development and Business Issue Project 'Team stated: "The City of Mounds View wilI be lrnown as a city with a balance between business and residential concems. There will be a positive business climate as shown by public�private collaboration to recnait, encourage, and retain successfiil, communiry-based enterprises with emphasis on job e�pansion, in�rease in ta�c base, and quality of life. There will be a cooperative spirit between the govemmerzt and citizens, whether residential or business, when setting reguiations into corle, Environmental and aestheYic consciousness will be i Planning Comcnzssion Pianning Case No. 46a-96: 2975 Highway 10 October 9, 1996 Page 8 demonstrated by a redesigned Highway lU, a nel,work of inter-connected teails, pazks, and wetland spaces, and active citizen participation in ecological activities." Two goals relative to Highway 10 were adopted and are included zn a.n aitactunent to this report. The applicant's proposal presents the chaIlenge of balancing between attracting a new business willing to take a somewhat blighted sit� and improv� it, with the chance to use ti�is opportuniiy to meet goals for the Highway 10 corridor, The City does have a loan progratn for businesses to make siie improvernents but it is only avaalable to business�s which have been in �Iounds View at least iwo years. The Planning . Commission could consider establishing a list of improvements which need to be made with approval of ihe conditional use permii, and a list of improvements to be done in two to three years from the date oi approvaL The phasing of the irtiprovements would ailow the applicants to apply for assistance from the City. Ai minimum, staff is recommending that the following be done now: , � parking lot be de�ined with curbing � a driveway entrance be defined from Spring Lake Road and excess asphait removed; the driveway entrance to Highway 10 be removed ' 0 landscaped areas at least 10' wide be created and cieaned up along the perimeter of the site o fencing be repaired and painted, posts reset and gaps ciosed; if the fencing is too deteriorated, ihat it be replaced � the building be painted a.nd signage from the windows removed • Phase 1 of a landscaping plan be implemented which wouid crea�e a cluster of trees and shrubs at corner of Spring Lake Road and Highway 10, coordinated witl� new manument-style signage Phase 2 of the improvements would be additional landscaping and new lightzng, to be instailed no later than three years from approval, (7) The use will not cause traffic hazards or congestian. The site has adequaie access from an arterial highway. The types ofr services being of%red will result in frequent customer turnover, but volumes wi116e 1ow because there are only two service bays on the property. No added traffic eongesiion is expected. Eliminating the driveway on fo Highway 10 will reduce traffic hazards. Planning Commission Plaiu�ing Case No. 46��96:. 2975 Highway 10 �cYober 9, I996 Page 9 (8) AdequaCe utilities, acc�ss roads, drainage and necessary faciiities have been or wi11 be provided. The proposal will �ase a previously deveioped site whictz is served by existing utilities and roads. There is an existing drainage ditch along Highway I0. Sialiwili be referring the proposal to �OT and the Rice Creek Watershed Disirict to defermine if ihere are any concems wiih the site drainage continuing as it has in ihe past. Sta� 12�corraraseaeda�ivr�: Our preliminary response to ti�e proposal is favorable if certain conditions are met. Staffwould recommend that the following additional informafion from the applicant or referrai agencies is needed prior to the next Planning Corrunission meetin�: Evidence oiownership or a noiarized letter from the owner giving permission for tlze filing of the application. 2. A site plan showing the parking lot defined with curbing and a driveway entrance no more than 30 feet in width onto Spring Lake Road; excess asphalt removed; the �-- driveway.p✓-°Anto Highway 10 reinoved, striping for parking sialls. Landscaped bu#�er area of at least 10 feet along �erimeier of site be shown. The plan should also show where fencing will be installed, a location for a dumpsi�r enclosure and a detail showing how the fencing and dumpster enciosure will be cansiructed. Fencing along Spring Lake Road should be at the inside (or western) edge af ihe 10 foot wide landscape buffer along this street so it is visible to the houses across the street. If the applicants intend to have outdoor storage, the siie plan should show where this area is to be located and that it will be enclosed by a solid fence or wall. A iandscaping and signage plan showing a clustering of landscaping at the intersection af Highway 10 and Spring Lake Road coordinated with new monument-style signage. Detaiis showing sign package. 4. l�esponse from MnDOT and Rice Creek i�atershed District on drainage (stai�to send referral). Photometrics on parking lot lighging, or opportunity for field check. 6. Applicanis' plans for outdoor starage, if any. 7. Inf°ormation on underground storage tanks. �� '? �-� ��YB'��'�.� ,r � f °� �.�°.� e.� i27 .1,�;2 y f'_,�:2�'. �, �qf�s L>'9,° f'�?. � �-',.i3P -Q�:� �, a �+ f y�'E ��`.�.+''+lc� -c:'�.� - i,; Q � % ,l�� r'`, �a ,i r� c%, di �e w--��,>��''��.✓_iS irs L °' i (,./,� f�"d � e' �'�: -Ii/, L. r� :� <. vt.it�� y -� �" �.�,-�; � ��..�; t: -�' �' I FIS17illrig COiilil]1SSlOi1 Planning Case No. 460-96: 2975 Hi�way 10 October 9, 1996 Page 10 St�.ff would recammenci that the following requirements be made: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. �. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. parking lot be seal coated and striped; curbing be installed � char�ges to driveway er�trances as noted above building be painted and signage on windows be removed �encin� be repaired and painted, post reset and gaps filled; replaced if too deteriorated parking lot Iighting be replaced no later than three years from date of approval; lighting to be placed in landscaped islands or at perimeter of parking iot additional landscaping be installed along Spring Lake Road and Highvaay TO witkun three years from date of appraval hours limited t� weekdays and Saturclays; no repair work done earlier ihan 8:00 AM or later than 6:40 PM (o%FCe may be open during additional hours) no fue( pumps allowed without approval of amee�ded CUI' no expansion of nutnber of service bays or building square footage without appraval of amended CUP no body work or painting permitted all repair work to be done inside the building; no cars parked outside in a dismantled state must meet performance standards in Sections 1103.09 - 1 i 03.15 in particular must meet Federal and State taws regarding underground storage tanks; musi meet Section 1103.17 on storage tank removal cc: Ron Qstrander, b95 E. 79th Street, Apt 2, Bloomington MN 55420 z�.-c%�_�j��.fi,�,�. c:-�.t.cR,..�a.�_.a�..�,a_ ,:�lt �9�. �i..�.�„�..<��4 �� %r�''' �-'�.``¢ c:.r�vt�c� .�/' ��:.� r a,�� .�! .-{j� �t�r-e. �s�L�r:�.-� 1 G�``�'t �� ..°��°�-�� C .��'�� a ; ; _ . " ; -' -- -_ _ �� -� y � 3�a� � �� x� �� .� �! � - -1� 1 � � i �� , _ �x�� p� ; _ �. �. . � AFPLlCA�di: . ._ - :: a= �;: _ .. _.0 (,"l-5%6� ��G� � _ , � � - i'� Y ho�� °�� ._ _ _. Z� 7 � . _. __. _ . . _.. _ .�,, ._. ,._ .. �_ .. �DOA�ss: i g p g � - : _ .. . . . - -- _ . - - �� . - �s�7] � - . St��ei Adcfress, �i�y, Staie, �td �p C�d� _ ..._ � - _. . _ _ . _: . _ . - _ - _ _ (� C� � �' 1 a �li` � {°y�e G� '�i p- � _ �j1 �m�n P� M N . . � �`" � i (� Z � _ °�- Irrte�� in Pr��a�rty (c. ecie �p�rapeiat� boxj: _._ (� � 7� : . _ , ___ . P � .. ❑ �wan�r o� Pr� e , : - - :. _ . ... : . .,�:. __ . . . . _ ❑ Car�ct for D�ec# �v�e� - _. _ _ - �. . <: •- - :�. . . _ ..: � : L�e, C�perata�, M1�'anager„ .. .: .: : ._ _.: _ __ . : ,. _. . - _. . _. __ .. . .. . . _. � . . __ � Agreem�rzt to Pur�ass `,_ , _, _ ; _ ..._ _ � --_.. . Other {�xplatnj �. _.. _ - - _.. �... . _._ _ ._. _. .._ - Qcx�[m�r�ry e;vid�e� af a�plEcar�s irr¢ere� ir4 1�i� peop�Y ��° � �9uu�ci befora fra�al _ _-.. _ ._ _. . - _ ' frak �Ry �°.son af �s� r�ue� . . .... � . .. . . _ _ . .. _ ,. .v- _ _• • .. r .. - PP��E�T°�' fNV�LV��, r.. . _- - . . w = — _ - - . - - _. � - - A�dress/Gener�f �.��a�ar� ` �� L� > ,, a ` - _ _ - �- ; . � . . . _ . . _ .. - . .. . _ __ . . : _ _ . . ..._ - _ . .: _: _ i :.: - ; _ . _ �_.,_;,. .. . _ ..: : . . . . _ ;: _ . . ��9� ��np�an ar Propesty ldentificQ�a� N�amb�r� �- ,� �� - � L°gal Qwer�er: Name/Addr�ss . . --� . , - , �1�`�70'2� - %� `D00� . , . .._ :. Preserrt Us� ci�e�� " - . .. ._... _ � ppr�pri�te bax)e .... . ._.._ _ , �.. _ � Urrdevelno acant -: _ . _, � - - ' � ; �; 5irtgte Famity �weiling - , z � - .�-�� ami� �w�!lfng ;` - 1 __ ,�_.. � �.t,:, wca F . _. �` � - `K--. .�.r� �!% �_I :..L' 'G.:� - Y' I �_ ,: - � y•VMulti��mily (�da. di Units - -��.�__.. . . - - i . _ ❑ �usin�:.ssJC�rnmerr°ai lishrt�ent — . _ - � - .. „ � . itt�us#aia[ Estabiist>ment - � - : ' : -_ .. _ .w ; r- ._- _ , _ � --� . . .: Other (�iaia�) - ., . -- � - -- - . -- - - - . _ _ s � : . - .. - --" �� - Property Classmcataon: . :.: _. � . __ . � . _ . -. .- _ .. �. _ ___ . .4�s�tra� �. � . . _ _. . .-_ _.. . . , . . _ � ❑ -Tarrens _ _ . : . _. . R�•.°,.UEjl°: . . _ �;- _ __ _� . _ -- -_ _ ; _ �., C�. -�u� � " , I � ..w.. �, ^a '_��P �1rtP141_�� dD�_n.L' _ --� , °a'ease noxe: A��lic3rst rctay be rescansiole ior aaci�cna! fees assaciareci I��Y �E��,L�i� iHl�i �� ,�,�OVE STA��J i A�E T rt requ �t » �iyn�cta�� f%mniett3 '��'�� Veeia� nditi�9 lls� � p�i Oevsiaa.!'Site Pleav I�vi�se Minor Su�ivisaan h4a�r Su�di�riai9rr C :m�. ?Is� .ame7tdmertt 'Metla�rc ,�[gr�arl P�rrnft �' Wedana 8tstfex �ssm�t r°'i�nnirsg Sicjri P�J Q rU� .�rersdm�m �CJ�9/ac�. minirrtum 52�. tn�amture �i3O�f8 f�i ��-2 - S'i v. �f a�9� S�Ca Fi-f � �2 - S'e 5. �i atPt� �c70 S75 • S1Q(7/�ce�e. ;�inirrst�rt i0tl. m�turt3 �i� S2r0 5�.� piu� SdrO d�osr� SZCd S a0 oius dsnems� dec�e�in� wv SP�$ S7 � S50 53 � S15d3 - s.r� ��.- �: `.'- T�! p� t7at� �� R�eiaf Numi�r Additionei F� r � Car� P�eca r'�s�B �lwnc�r ..�� r� � - �- _ 5,�� .� 9er� a4 �n�.i �°.,�y A�Pfat�V� �i ��II�� - iA6l�� L.; �� - � Pl�rsning ,�ta. U/ ,- 4 1�q � � — �� ndmiet. �6ceaurrt ��lo_ n F�l� _ ,,.. ; -.. . _ - _ _ . _ - � � _ °;;;:r:; _ . ... . .. _. . ...__. _ . .. .�-. : : - .._..... �.;. _.:�.___.�__.._. _ ... ... .. ._....�+�_..-......._ - _ -.. -_�. _. __ ... . : .�-- _ . , :. : . . �__:. ,. ._�_< . ' N E v. .� ._ _.,. � _ �, - - . ._ _. . - d � � ° 1 =-- - � . 0 0 � o 0'49 C� � � �' ==� � . . � . . � . . �NOR7H-_._. COUNT`( mz-- ,LIN . . "� n n � 849 N N 49 8499 8490 r`"i �� o�o m �� 849 n n 849 9 w� 0 8494 649 � ' B48 8485 8484 8489 8�0 `�` B� N N N N � 8490 @q8 16 8�0 ea7� eaao a� e4�o ; 8480 ; 8482 8461 8488 847a 8479 8470 8�7 8474 g�5 8484 B47 Q 84&9 8468 8463 8470 8475 9474 947t 84B6 I 8460 846 •B&5 H45 � 8454 � 8467 84 p 846J �4Sfi 84fi1 8460 8� 84s �5 8465 84fi5 8454 � N 8455 9459 8450 8458 � Sqg 8455 8440 84-4i � 8455 8454 8455 8450 8�. ea-a� eaaa e4as e aaas saaa a ; - 843 8a31 B43& i,,� 9438 8438 B�t 8432 � 8431 8`� 8�T 8444- � g4q5 844& ; • 8425 843� Z � 842 fl�21 8�0 � 9429 8432 8424 8425 g,�3� 8�5 8434 8433 8432 84t2 8417 8421 � 84�3 8426 8419 8�0 8425 8424 8425 8428 I � 84t8 8419 8415 8420 8415 8414 • 8402 Ca 8401 84i9 8420 8409 8392 . 8392 B39t 8�6 8407 H41 8475 8�614 q.da 8401 8406 8�5 8404 8415 8408 W �, 8384 839U 8405 $`� ` 8390 8389 8394 8463 8q� 8409 8408 gy �� 837B 8389 8�� g 838¢ �9395 8�� • 8386 8387 8391 g� g�� g398 8379 8380 g�3 �37p �$9 8391 8388 7 8370 8388 8380 8385 838� 838z 8387 6378 37 n,.�� 836 8365 8372 8360 8375 8380 � �370 � $ 4 8381 8372 8371 8�6b � 8369 m�@360 8355 �68 Y 8350 8355 8350 8371 837Y 878 83Si 834 83b5 �364 H3�45 8340 8345 834-0 ' 8354 83�5 /�/ 8360 8360 Y 8359 8350 8351 8346 8�� 8331 8330 8335 83�0 ! L[ 8355 83 � 8347 g3S e�� 8335 8325 8320 fl350 8341 8J4;S 8342 8335 g�„y 8325 H31Z ��5 �2a 8315 83f8 � • 8340 83� �36 8334 Q 8339 8335 8332 83i� 8300 8.703 8310 w 8305 8370 8330 g3s5 8325 8330 � 8333 8330 8333 8322 8P3p � 829t 8290 � 8305 82g0 8295 n 8320 8325 83f6 �315 8322 q 8321 B325 8300 � 8285 8280 8287 8280 ' L� � J 8267 8280 2 t!i . ��0 83i5 8311 8308 Y 831 � 8275 8270 a 8281 8270tn 8279 8^'q • 8300 8305 8312 8287 8298 8301 GRQ�� 8265 82$0 ��73 826fl 8261 ' 8284 8285 82gp 8289 82�0 8285 F�ARK `� , �F 8255 8250 g167 8250 8251 82� �0 8275 8281 8250 8261 � ; v v m �n n a, 8240 8261 ,^ 824U M �� : W z ea�a B2fi5 8230 824f N� N n n P r�. � �'a m� o'�o ' 8270 � 8265 �O� a c�a N N 8230 8255 N �'+ N�� e ; 8280 8255 o m N o: AV� r � 8248 a- o 0 0:' � r� �s �- � � o � 8arJ0 J 8z4J N N N N'."' N N N 82 m u0 � m m I� h n �- 8�� N N N N N N N N N 8 ' 8244 Pl 8233 H22H 82�r 8206 8210 � ' 82 8227 � gy z�f3 8202 �� p 8i84 � i 823 -+ 8201 82to 8277 Bi98 8205 c�v a N N 8180 I 879 5 � . � a�7r a�9� e�e2 a eao3 azoa �R � 1 Z M N� � u, �m �0 8775 `•°_ 0�^ 8160 �,� 12 � 8180 5160 � N N 8200 N N��` B� 8165 � �� ' L K—� t �� 8780 8148 p LAPORi 8155 p��{� G.� 8950 � ; \ �ii% Bifii N p�. � e'7 ly p 8i4.7 �! -D �I � j {� 3 8 �r N rn: 8738 m m m �� 814 � e 6, � 1' - O.81SB �7 `�0 �:' N N N N N Bi3S d� �iA H14O � i > I `O 8141 � �� o�-'4CE �63 8132 8727 8125 8130 813 r! � � � \• rn I� � $58 $11 rs�i N� n� o o� t i v a n N P n� � i � a � ��+ �\ BS13i ``!i •, N cV mN � 8106 N N N N N N N N N N N c'^V 8iZ iZ N N N N N/� }� I I � (� � 8t0 RAVQV t�7 N �O cV � m O �n a0 � � �� \ � Sp$ N�� en � N N 8080 Q 808t N N 8088 8075 � N m-- ! \• � „"�� 8060 8065 8Q84 $� 8070 g(}7� $asb 8079 8068 � \ N 8� 8075 SpS 8059 8050 8055 8Q60 � y� E�� eo3o 80� 80� ea� eoaa aoaz soas aosz � o eoae eass sosa � �� y °� so2s aoas eQ2 x ao�3 eo4o � � �\• so2o sazs aois sots o sa2s aa�s eo9a a000 �° s� � � � �� geo eoas aoaa e�s �°1 aaas aoos ; N! i i 7930 7985 8004 7981 799b � 7981 7S 1� � �,` '! � A� ;� 798 7975 7970 7979 7980 7969 79b.: '�• n 'Y � 7960 7965 7960 7959 7970 7965 , � i `�° N o N m 795 7955 7986 � 7949 7954 7959 7956 l N 7934 7933 �� 794-0 7445 79fi6 � - Vi.cinity Mapc 460-96 � �sso � � � �° 1;1. '7930 7935 7930 2975 Highway 10 79�a s°� � � °' I Applican�o Ostrander/MacDonald ., R�'? � •�n ^� N 7soo 790� 790° N N N 7900 t \ I r� n n r''. 7 2f � 5� ^ c�� . C33' r, 0 � cti �..., � �-, � � � d- (� Scale: l" = 50 feet Approxi�ate location o£ bui�d�r�gs from aerial photographs, 2975 Hi.ghway IO _ ; � � �, �: , ; _ z �_;� , �; � . : r . - _: �_ ,. : � , � , , , . :� : � . -- ..; � -�� ; : �, ; ; r .. �' .:::.: , _ , , � .. • '� - �1_ . ': :+� � . i : : �- `� • • ��, f �' , � ,' � :� .. * � : �. • a: � t � �: : .�* _ � ■ - � Work cooperatively with the landscape nnit of MN/DOT io coordinate and use their Com- munity Roadside Er�hancement Prog7ram. � Coordinate with and make use of the knowledge of th� Mour�ds tliew City F'orester. � Svlicii a des�gn firin to develap a piar� usin� lfghtin�9 flowers and grassy areas to beautify the Highway 10 carridor. °�Ia�Ce �xse of service groups (i.�. Lio�s, SCQ1atS� �O PD�illlteei filiii� SIl(�/OI Y11�IIe� �Oi aeSttteflC improvement of the Fiighway 10 corridor. � Develop incentives %r local businesses io imprave sites by adding gx°ee�space, flowers, etce � Work with the I�arks I7epartment to �plement �heir plan to conn�ct bicycle and wallcing trails throughout the City to Hi�hway 1Qa ��. �,. ; �.1' `. :�:; ..: , � - ' � . , ., _ . . - .� . �:.; . _ '� ,. .. : ;. : _ . , �, ,: . : � �; . . . � �� , , : � �, , ; � - ; ; ,�, �: �, ,► �� , � ; . , , ,_ < �._.,-... � a Consider amending por�ions oi the City sign eode to allow for increased directional signage along Highway 10. • ' � , � Take an active �ole in the pla�ing of e�ts, entrances, az�d tur�-a�ounds in and arou.nd Highway 10. � Develop methods for connecting th� nozihem and south�rn seciioz�s of towxa across Highway 1Q, such as by building a pedestri� az�d bicycle b�idge at Long Lake Road a� Caunty Road I. � � '� � ; ((�`� �� l,� ' . . � , � �. �� Too Ildounds Vtew Planning Commission . Fe°o�ne Pamela Sheldon, Community Development Direc�or � Su6jeci: Setbacks for Paricing Lots, and Lot Area Requirement for Non-Residential Uses P(arining Case I�o. SP-008�96 Dateo October 7, 1996 l�eeiing of Octobec 9, 1996 Isswe Ivit°. Danny D. I�Ioon, a property owner in iviounds View, has requested that the Zoning Code be amended to require a minimum 15 %ot setback between parking tots and property Iines, when the parking lots are for churches or any c�mmercial uses, and these uses abut residential uses. At your meetings on September 18 and October 2, the Planning Commission reviewed draft ordinances which would address this request, as weIi as esiablish a minimum loi size for non- residential uses in residential districts and clarify some ambiguous pravisions in the Zoning Code. Itecomrraer�dation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopi Resolution No. 474-9b recommending to ihe City Council adoption of Ordinance No. 590 amending the Mounds View Zoning Code, Title 1100, Sections 1102.01, 1104.0 i, 1104.02, 1 I Ob.04, 1107.45, 1109.04, 1110.04, 112 i.09, l 12i.11, and 1123.02. I)iscussion The proposed ordinance shows changes from the existing Zoning Code b,y underlinging%(new wording) and striiceouts (wording to be deleted). 'To aid the Plannim� Conramis�ior� in its review, r�oa°dang which is �ew from yoar meeti�ng on October 2 meetiaag is shaded. �'his is the only wardeng �o�a need to �°e�vie�r iiyou vvani to see th� ch�mges sinc� o�r last diseuss�on. Sections b, 7 and 8 of the ordinance are also new but have just been added so the minimuen lot size requirement of one acre tracks through the districts. The proposed ordinance wouid: a add a definition of "principal building" � clarify that the setbacks in the table in 1104.01 Subd. 3 pertain to principai builciings � clarify when and how front setbacks for ne�r✓ residences in ihe It-1 and R-2 districts shall t�e adjusted based on the setbac�CS of existing resider�ces in the same biock Mounds View Pianriing Commission Page 2 Oc�ober �, 1996 � clarify tha� garages, which are part of a residence and have a side se�back of five feet, � cannot be converted into living space between five feet and ten feet of the side lot Iine � create a section on setbacks for accessory buildings, and clarify setback provisions such that no accessory buildings may be Iocated in front of a residence in the residentiai districts, and side setbacks from streets on corner lots shall be the same as ihe residence (30 fest}. It alsa would aliow accessory buildings of 864 square feet or less to b� placed withiz� ten feet of the side or rear property lin� in the business and industrial districts. 0 create a section on setbacks for parking areas and driveways: * estabIishes a minimum parking lot setback of 20 feei, for sites having 2.5 acres or tess, and 30 feefi, for sites haying more than 2.5 acres, where the parking lot serves a non-residential use and'� abuts praperty in a residentiai disfirict * estab(ishes a 15 foot setback for parking lots from streetside {whether front, side or rear) for any multiple family residentia] (three or more attached units) and targer} and non-residential use in any district �` retains existing setbacks for parking areas from front property lines in business (30') and industrzal (40') * retains existing setbacks for parking areas from side and rear property iines in business and industrial districts (5') except when abutting residential (20', 30') or streets (15') ; e ciarifies setbacks requirements from "second" front on through lots -" � establish a requirement that a property owner obtain an encroachment permit for driveways or parking areas in easements, if required by the City • estabiish a minimum lot size of one acre for non-residential uses Iocated in residential districts, except for governmental and public utiliiy buildings and structures necessary for the health, safety and general welfare of the cammunity � allows e�cisting garicing areas which do not conform to the new setbacic requirernents to be considered tegal, non-conforming uses, and allows them to be resurfaced, restriped, repaired and replaced in compliance with the original setback requirements, except that if they are being recanstnicted or replaced and it is possible to meet the new setback requirement�witti�losing required parking spaces, ihey shall be made confoxxning to the new setback requirements . � a number of cross-references have been added to help readers navigate the Code The proposed ordinance establishes a stricter requirement For setbacks for parkin� lots which abut residential properiy, when the lois are for non-residential uses, than was reques�ed by Mr. Moon. His request was for 15 feet. The ordinance establishes the requirement at 20 feet (for 2.5 acre or smaller sites) and 30 (for sites larger than 2.5 acres}. (Staff has checiced the site plan approved for Cross of Glory, as was requested by the Plar�ning Commission, and they could proceed under the new ordinance with th� construc�ion of the expanded parkine lat. The setback to County Road I is �,3 feet, and to the east properiy line is 25 feet. The new requirements wouid be 24 feet and 20 feet, respectiv�ly.) �/iounds �Iiew Planning Commission Page 3 �ctober 8, 1996 The only pravision which the Ptanning Comrnissior� did not have an apportunity to discuss in prioc meetings is the setback far parking lots for multip(e family residential and non�residential uses frorr� streets. Staff is recommending that a setback of ai least I 5 feet be required �o allow room far landscaping. cc: Dan Moon, b929 Pleasant �/iew Drive, �ounds View MN 55112 by FAX: 783-1853 -:� . .:. . . . ::. :� ,.. i ,_-.:�... �: , . ..,: . � , .:: ,-.:.,. . . ,._ _, .,.;� ;:. . .-__. . ::-. �... ..._ .., _.: .. .. �,. .:_- ,..,:. .-.:.:. .....,_ .....- . . -� -.--�-"'--. '--':. .....'('.:�...'.i .. .�.:: � , .��.:�. ,. � �_ :a , . j, i, ��_ :�_ � '�� 1�� :_ 1 �.�: , : ��. `i� : � �� ` 1; ,.. ... � �` `�. ,� ;�� ; , ;�; � _ ° :_� .. � ��;: �s �+ Ir 1. � � ' � �� : �; :f � � � — �� . ��. �� =� " � : � � � � * � �� `i; � � 1- I��'� �- � �� " :S� ; �- �: 1 �� `� .!. �, �,. : � : � . `I;� �B9�Y .EJ.�l'1 �A' �A6iJ�J1`l�l\�E 1��. S�oy t'11i �1�A711`I�1V�1`d IilYlBr' 1Y3P11�4F � 1'0%� V1VBfJ �W Z��iG CODE, 'I'�'�'LE 110Q, SECT'IOl�dS 114200�, 1104.01, 1104.02, �106.04, �107e05, 1109D04, 1114004, �1�1.09, 1221011, ��►d 1123a02; PI,r�,�dl�dIr1G C'A5E NOo �P-00�- 950 �REAS, residential districts aliow for certain non-residential uses such as schools, day care cen�ers, community centees, churches, and nursing hornes as conditional uses, and additional buffering is needed between the parking lots associated with these uses and adjacent residential uses; and, Wi�EREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed the request oiDan�y D. Moon for an arnendmeni to the Mounds View Zoning Code io require a se�back of fifteen feet for parking lots for churches and commercial uses, where such partcing lots abut property in a residential district; and, ` `3 - WI�REAS, in reviewing this request, the Planning Commission has concluded that setbacks of twenty feet, foc parking lots on sites of 2.5 acres or less, and thirty %et, for parking lo�s on sites of more than 2.5 acres, where such parking lots serve non-residential uses and abut property in a resideniial disirict, is advisable to allow sufficient landscaping and buffering between residentzal properties and non-residential uses; and, �� V4THEREAS, in reviewing ttus request, the Planning Commission has identified additiona.l ��.,a �rovement needed in the Zoning Code including establishing a minimum lot size for non- residential uses in residential ciistricts, clarifying vvhen and how front setbacks for new residences in the R-i and R-2 districts shall be adjusted based orc the setbacks of existing residences in the same block, clarifying and establishing setback requiremenis for accessory buildings, clarifying setback requirements from "second fronCs" on through lois, inereasing parking lot setbacks from streets far multiple family residential, commercial and industrial uses, and adding cross-references; and, U+IHEREA�, r�vith the adopiion of increased setbacks for parkirrg lots abutting residenrial properties, it is advisahle to address the continued use of existing parking lots which do not conform to the revised setback requirements, and the abiiity to repair and resurface therr�i'�j �,�- t WI-�EREAS, the Planning Commission recorrimends provision he made for e;cisting parking Iots w�ich would not�riie�the new setback requirements to be treat�d as legal non- conforming uses. ± �ds�� PIanning Commission Resolution No. 474-96 Octobet 9, 1996 Page 2 I�1OW, 7f�REFOI�E, BE IT RESOLVED, tha� the Ivlounds View Plannir�g Commission does hereby recommend adoption of Ordinance No. 590 as shovam in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a par� of this resoluiion by this reference. Adopted this 9th day of October, 1996, ATTEST: Jerry Peterson, Chairman Pamela Sheidon, Commuruty Development Director i MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING C�MMISSION RE50LUTION NOo 474--46: EXHIBIT "A" =�i '. :!? �:i� �_ �'� . 1„�;. � - , � -�,, �; ; :�,, ._ �. ��, �� , ! 1'- : �_ i. ; , . �,, ,. • . 1' - ` � � � ':. :1 <�� _ � , � ;• � ' ,. 1��. : : - �� -� � . ;:: •�� . , > y. �. �' ' �� .1 , .; ` � " -, , �. . �� t ��. r ;�� ,> � •� � ;, � r� �� i�, ��: ,t' . .�"�. : � ' '�, � ; :< �• ; : � �. ;.; �, �,., . . '.1�� 1; .�: �.__ :� 1 �� 1, �� , ]I r `t. „ : � , ��' : ��. ; �� ;- � :�� '`� i �: . .! '; "' 1� � �� ' •�. r ��.1� � � : �f� > �� . � �r 1� 1`� �'� �, �° ,.; I:; 4" ;,F: I;. I•: t :1, !�!. '. t_i:. : it•'.i�. ; ! i. 1' 1 d ;: THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIE'W ORDAIIVS: �ectaor� lo Section 1102.01 is hereby amended to add a new Subd. 88, "Principal Building" as stated below, and the subsequent subdivisions in this section are to be renumbered accordingiy. Suhd. 88. Principal Building; The main or primary buildin� coniainin�the principal use of a,.propertv as distinguished from an accessory building_ Sec#�oe� 2, Section I 104.OI Subd. 3. Is hereby amer�ded to read as follows: Subd. 3. Setbacks %r Principal Buildin�s; The setback distances listed in the table below '`' apply to principal buildin s, except as otherwise provided for conditional uses in specific zonin� dist�icts. All setback distances shown, ' ' , shall be measured from the appropriate lot Iine. �'he lettered footnotes correspond to Section 1104.�1 5ubd. 3, a., b., c., and d. Front Yard Side Yard Rear Yard District` Minimum ltinimum Wtten Abuts Minimum When Abuts Residential Residential R-1 3� a.d. i4 b. 30d. R-2 30 a.d. TO b. 34d, R-3 30 10 c. 20 c, 30 40 R-4 30 20 c. 20 c. 30 50 R=5 �- As required under Chapter 1110.05 of this Title -- R-O 30 20 c. 20 c. 30 50 B-1 30 d- 10 c. 20 c. 20 30 B-2 30 �- 1 a c. 20 c. 20 30 1Letfered footnotes in this tabEe correspond to Section 1104.01 5ubd 3 a b c and d .: Ordinartce No. 59Q Page 2 Front Yard Side Yard Rear Yard Districtz Minimum Minunum When Abuts Minimum When Abuts Residentiai Residential B-3 30 � 10 c. 20 c. 20 40 B-4 30 d-: 14 c. 30 3d 40 I-1 40 c#: 20 c. 40 , 40 40 PUD -- As required under Chagter 1120 of this 'Fitle -- �;.,�,; y �_�,. ;:; ,: a. � c. Viihere adja�ni-struc�res� r�ncipal buzldi block on the same. side of t�e street have : ::; required, the �v�s�mmurri front yard setback within the same ;cent..fi-om those 'ri€ic�t�res shall be setback in existence for any one lot. , . Izz no case shall the front yard setback be less than thirty feet (30'). For purposes of this subsection a.. a block Not less than thirry feet (30') from the lot line if lot is on corner. , _ Not less than thirty feet (30') from lot line if Iot is an corner. Fiil!f..lslf:.l��f,f-�� •"� •.� -•��i_,........ ..>.. �.:.�.� ,.� .��....�.. ,;: ..�.� .�_ �i .._*. _ � � , u:f Seciion 3o Section 1104.Oi Subd. 4. Is hereby amended to read as follows: -' ■: i i ' • .. .� _. . . .. . ,.. � _..��..� �. ,. ... .�.., n ".:'.... .� . _ � _. :: .. � + .., ._ � . ,..:. .. . ..:.. •1 . �,. � . ._ . _..__ _ . _ .. � � � . -., s �,.. .. � � . . _ . . _. ,. ... . .. �. � .. _�v . . ' l � . ...� .�. -rr ; . � - � � �; ..�.. • • �.�., .� ,�r.._...�.. ,_ ....,. ..�._ • ." .:� .. _.. �,•.t- _..� •.� w.... ..� .��.... -•� �.�..,... �. _.�.�. a `.. , . :.,.. �� ...,.., . � .. :.,...� �l.. . � :.:_ . �..:.,. .`�,. ,.' ,,. ,� ..: ` " � ' . _� _ � �.. � s . � - _r • � _� �r.Xr�yr��.�r[aa�'��Y:S�.•r.a . .� . . � . _._ . _ � _ � .. ,� � �_ � ZLettered footnotes irt this tahte correspond to Section 1104.OI Subd._3. a., b„ c., and d. Ordinarice No. S 90 Page 3 Subd. 4. Ailinimum Setbacks for Accessory Buiidings. Driveways and Parkir�g Areas a. Accessarv Buildin��detackzed firom a principal buildin�): � R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4, R-S and R-O: � � � t.i 4.' � �� front: no accesson� buildir�� shall be located between the fron� ►ine of the principal buiiding and the front lot Iine side: five feet (5'1 exce�t the minimum setback shall be 3Q' from anX lot line abutting a public street rear: five feet {5') �2 AlI other districts: � �'��; ��; �� :.�:: � � :F:> ::::::f.�;:::::::::: - ��:<:;::s�ni�>;as:;:'`>.ra�tcs' ::��:�:�i�iild'it�>:; c. Parkin� Areas: �1 Ral. R-2, R-3, R-4_R5, R-O: � resider�tial uses: Ordinance No. 590 Page 4 � ��` `Y�� ,,.. _ , 524, 2-22-93 Surfacing of temporary �arkin�; areas shall be in accordance wiih Section 1121.09 Subd. 7. . �b} non-residential uses: j„1�. for sites having two and one-half (2 5 acres or less� twenty feet (20'1 j2]J for sites havin� more than two and one-half (2 5, acres� thir�y feet (30'� B-1, B-2, B-3. B-4 ,parkin_ areas and loadin� dock�,� � front: 30 Feet b� side and rear: 5 feet, except as foilows: 1� where a non-residential use abuts a ro ert in a residential district ihe setback for arlun areas from the common �ro�ertv line shali be as stated in Section 1104 04 Subd 4.c.l.b. :::.:::;::>:,,.:::<:::«:>::»::>•::>: :�.: _.� � :: :. -�;:,:: :;;:;;;:.::<.::.;-:.:::. :2:: :�rlte: ::..,,.; .,.,,..:...-; . , � r.�..a. ark�n �<�c�a::a�ut�<-a;::sr��::�'��:�::�eeti I-1 (parking areas and loadin� docksl' � � front; 40 feet side and rear: 5 feet, exce�t as follows: � ��,�.�= .. �.,. ,.,� `�:: � where a non-residentia! use abuts a property in a residentiai district, the setback for parking areas from the common �ropertv line shall be as stated in Section 1104.04 Subd 4.c.2,b. � � :::<:::::,: <}:::>� <: .<;: ..>>..<. :v�?E�'ere:>�::::,.; :::::::::.:. .:.:::<;:::::-..-: :;:::;:;:.:.:;.>:: .<:::::;:>,.;:<;:.:,::::<:;: . :.:: ... a �l��rr .are�.�b. f . �.str.�e .� l.�>.�e�t �ectio� 4o Section 1104.02 Subd. 2_ is hereby amended to read as �'ollows: Subd. 2. Lot �S Dimensions: Lot ' width and area sha�l not be less than the following: a. Width (1) R-1 interior loti 75 feei ;, �, Ordinance No. 590 Page 5 {2) R� 1 corner iot, R�2, R�3, R-4, R-O 100 feet b. Niinimum Lot Area (I) Computations for 1ot area. shall not include land beyond a depth oi ot�e hundred fifly feet (150'} on lots having less than one hundred foot (100'} frontage. (2} Lots �Za�siz�;::�i�;i�al�:�'a:ar �reater than one hundred foof (100'} frontage may use depths not exceeding one and one-haif (1-1/2) times the frontage in computing (ot area. (3) Minimum lot siz� area requiremeni shall be as stated in the table condominiums, planned unit developments and multiple family developments shall be calculaied on ihe basis of the total area in the �roiect and as controlled by_an individual and/or„joint ownershiQ Ordinance No. 590 Page b DistricUType of Lot� Minirnum Lot Size IVtinimum Lot Area (in square feet� Per Dweiling Unit (3i �in square feet) IZ-1 Interior 11,000 1 i,000 {no more than one unit et lot regardless of lot sizel R-1 Comer Lot 12,500 12 5�0 no more ihan one unit per lot re�ardless of lot size) R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4, R-5 43.560 (1 acre�, � Non-residential uses iisted as conditionaI usesa except for govemmental and public utilitv buildings and structures necessarv for khe health, safetv and eg neral welfare of the communitv R-2, � -12,500 for lot developed rvith single- • C2 �(1� for sin 1� ��n�Y deta��iet� DupleYes, f� 6�'o ' e family detached dwellin�• c�ell�nes tna int�re ��n pr�� i� �, f�ff,�r �r,,��;a �� - G.��t� for each half of divided lot ea�.6trc a�ti��ss,o£`I�t�st�� develo ed with two-famil dwellin � G.2�t� �or e7e�. z�1�i�:>i� � t�vo� - 7� ��i�i for undivided lot developed with �'�mii� dweilin� �no: zr�ore?f�r�ii two�familv dwellin� �CUO units pei- fc�t re `�z�s o€' I� si'xe R-4 singte familv detached: I 1,000 Townhouses. Condominiums. two-familv: 6,250 Planned Unit Developments. townhouse: 6,500 iViultiple Familv (4) maltible famil� 2,500 I�1 43,560 (1 acre} B-1 B-2 B-3 B-4 no minimum; must allow for setbacics and paricin� requirements to be met = . :� .., �.. . ,, ; � .� . � . �, �= , ..- : . ,. �_� . .. * � _� ,. ., , . ... : . . .;; � �r 3 Numbered footnotes in this table correspond to Section 1104.02 Subd. 2,b.(3) and (4). , _; Ordinance No. 590 Page 7 �-}� Usable Open �pace: Each rriultiple-faenily dw�lling site sha.lt co�tain at ieast six hundced twenty five (625) square feet of usable open space as defined by subdivisioct 1102.02(109) of �his Code for each dwellin� unit contained therein. Section 6e Section 110b.04 S�abd. 1 and �ection 1110,44 Subd. 2 are hereby amended io cead as follows: Subd. 1, in Section 1106.�4 Subd. 2. in Section 1110.04 Pubiic or semi-�ublic recreational buildings and �eighborhood or community cer�ters, public and privaie educational institutions lirnited to �lementary, junior high and senior high schools and religious instiiutions, such as churches, chapels, temples and synagogtaes; provided, that: a. Frant yard depths shall be a minimum of thirty �ive feet {3 5'). b. Side yards shall be no less than thirty feet (30'). �: �d. Adequate screening from abu�ting residential uses and landscaping is prov�ded in compliance with Section 1103.08�6j of this Title. �e, Adequaie off-street parking and access is provided on the site or on Lots directly abutting or directly across a public streeY to ihe principal use in compliance with Chapter 1 l21 of this Title and that such parking is adequateiy screened and landscaped frorn surrounding and abuttmg residential uses in compliance with S�ction I 103.08 ffr} of ihis Tiile. t:f, Adequate off-street loadin� and service entrances are provided and regulated where applicable by Chapter 1122 of this Title. f.� The provisions of Subdivision 1125,41(1)e ofthis Title are considered and satisfac�orily met. S�ction io Section I107.45 Subd. 2 and Section 1110.04 Subd. 7 are hereby amended io read as follows: � Subd. 2 in Section 1107.OS. �u6d. 7 im Sectioe� 1110.04. Day care, group nurser}r; provided, that, a. No overnight facilities are provided for the cl�ildren setved. Children are deliv�red and removed daiIy. , b. Th� front yard depth shall b� a n�inimum of thirty feet (30'). i ;' OTC{ll17IICe NO. S9O Page 8 '�:: e: d. I�o iess than �orty (40} square feet of ouiside play space per child shall be provided and that such spac� be suitabty fenced and/or screened in accordance wiih c�nditions as may b� specified by the City Councii. �r: e. Adequate off-street parking and access is provided in compliance urith Chapter 1121 of this Title. �:f. Adequa�ie off-street loading and service entrances are provided in complia.nce with Chapter 1 l22 of this Title. �ge Tlie site and related parking and service entrances shall be served by an arterial oF collector street of sufficient capacity to accommodate the traffic which wilI be generated. �h. All signing and informational or visual communication de�ices shall be in cotnplianc� with fihe Mounds View Sign Code. �ri. The provisions of subdivision 1125.01(1).e. of this Title are considered and satisfactoriiy met. (198$ Code §40.11) Sectio� �. Section 1109.04 Subd 2. and Section I 110.04 Subd. 8 are heceby amended to read as folIows: � Subd, 2, in 5ection 1109.04 �ubd. 8, in Section 1110.04 Nursing homes and similar group housing but not including hospi�aIs, sanitariums or similar insYitutions; provided, that: a. Side yards double the minimum requiremenis established for this District and are screened in compliance with Section �, . 1103.08 of this Title. � �r.c. Onty the rear yard shall be used for play or r�creationai area. 5aid area shall be fenced and controlIed and screened in compliance with Section � . . 1103.08 of this Title. cd. The site shall be served by an arteria[ or collector street of su#�icient capacity to accommodate traflic wfuch wili be generated. d°e. Ali signing a.nd informational or visual communication devices shail be in comphance with the Mounds View Sign Code. �:f A.11 State iaws and statutes governing such use are strictly adhered to, and all required operating pernuts are secured. Ordinance No. 590 Page 9 �-� �h. Or� ofri street ioading �pace ic� compliance with Chapt�r I 122 of ihis 'I'itle is provided. The pravisions of suhdivision 1 I25.01{1)e of this iitle are considered and satisfactorily met. � Section 90 3ection 1121.09 Subd. 11 is hereby amended to read as follows: Subd. 11. Curbing and Landscaping: Except for single-family, two-family and townhouses (in develo�ments of six units or lessl, ali open off street parking shail have a perimeter curb barrier araund the entire parking lot_ ,' . The locaiion of this curb barrier shall compl� with the setback requirements �'or parking areas sta#ed in Section 1104.41 Subd. 4. Grass, plantings or surfacing materials shall be provided in all areas bordering the parki�g area. ��ctior� l0o Section 1121.1 i Subd. 3 is hereby amended to read as �ollows: Subd. 3. Accessory ofi street parking . shall comt�iy with the required minimum setbacks as stated in Section 1104 O1 Subd. 4. �eetiore il. � Sectian 1123.02 �ubd. 1 is hereby amended to read as follows: Subd. I. Continuance of Use: �a.� Genera(: Any structure or use iawFully eacisting prior to a�rn ' g� . . . .t � i . . . . . . . • . _. . . . . . structure or use nonconformin� shall not be enlarged but may be continued a� the size and in the manner af aperation existin� upon such date, excepi as hereinafter specified or subsequently amended. . (� Parki _R ac; Ordinance No. 590 Page 10 Read by the City Council of the City o�N�ounds jliew this day of , 1996. Read and passed by the City Council of the Ciiry of Mounds View this day of _ , I996. ATTEST: Jerry Linke, Mayor Chuc� Wiuting, Ciiy Clerk-Administrator APPROVED A� TO FORM: _ Robert Long, City Atiorney � i �; �� _ �_ � , �, • ��, � � ..� ; �. � � � � : • .� �,, , � � ,, , , AGENDA �IEETING AGE�A Review of Minutes (Novembee 6, 1966) 2. Citizens Requests and Commenis on Items Not an the Agenda ----------------------------------------.._.�______________e______---------___e__-------____----a..__�_ee CITrZENS: BEFORE SPEAKING, PLEASE COME TO THE PODIUM, AND GIVE YOUR FULL NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE MINiJTES ]PL,AI�[IaIG COI�/IlV1I�SiO1V: Call to 4rrder Items for I)ecision 3. Cail to Order 4. Roll Call �lanning Case No. 462-9b 2535�2585 Highway 10 Applicant: Paster Enterprises (dba: Mounds View Assoc. LLP} Public Hearing Item (continued &om November b, 1995 meeting): . ' Request for approval of a variance to the Sign Code for pylon sign, signs at driveway entrances and a sign at the intersection of Long Lake Road and Highway I0. b. Piane�iag Case No. 467-96 2535 Highway 10 AppIicant: Land Patterns Landscaping Request �or approval of a conditional use permit for temporary oatdoor sales of Christmas trees in parkin� Iot of Bridgeman's Restaurant PLAI�NIIeiG COlVIIVIISSION: tldjourn to t�GENDr15ES3IOl�d Itestas for Discussion 7. Ptanning C'ase 1Vo. 466-96 ;532-75�0 Silver Lake Road Applicant: L;arry Beach, on behalf of Richard �din and Wiiliatn Culbert Request for a minor subdivision to move 12.5 feei from 7532 Silver Lake Road to 754d SiIver Lake Road �***�*��z��*�*��*��* APPLICANTS: YOUR ATTENDANCE AT THIS MEETING IS REQUESTED. PLEASE NOTIFY Cii'Y HALL AT 784-305� IF YOU ARE UNABLE TO ATTEND. THANK YOU. ��*��*��*�� Agenda Continued Planning Commission Agenda November 20, I496 Page 2 Plannin� Case l�o, 465-96 2375-2395 Highway IO Applicant: Saturn Develop�nent Request for approval of a variance to allow directionat signs at driveway entrances (one on Highway Ip and one on County Road H2) 9• 1Vleeiing Schedule for 1997 10. Staff Reports/Information Items � 1• Chairperson and Plaruiing Commissioners Reports I2. Adjournment c:lwpdocslplancommlagenda 1 I , 20 ,�� , , � ' � �,,,. � , � �� • _�'.�� R.° � �. � 2401 Highway 10, �!i The Niounds View Planning Commission was called to arder by Chair Peterson at 7:Q3 p.m. on November 6, 199f. MEMBEFtS PRESENi: �ommissioners Miiler, Brooks, Sfevenson, Obert, Johnsion, Brasaemle and Chair 6'eterson. ALSO PRESENT: Community Develo Direcfior Sheldon, F'lar�ning Associate and F�ecording S�cretary �enesch. ;;;:; The Planning Commission rev;i�viied fih�:::�;::�` minutes of 4he speciaf ine�tir��:�o� Octn��;;;�, :.,..�,,; f::...... 199fi. The �alfc�wing c�.��o�is �nrere �i�t�r�� °i;, ;:: ;:.:. Page 1.:�.:��s� ��:�., "�y»:>��c�(c� r��d ar�, �� e �. : 2, third lir�� ',��::>shauld ��i ��s 3} Second ;:� ::. :. ::::.:::.;:: ;;:. 4.,�,.,.V.,,� _.. . _ _ _ . _. page, third ��'��t'��h, lir��s �a ��d �;�hould read " if th� lot.:i�t...�..��d:."C�mr��'t��" should `� �z; read Comtr��ac��r::>:,:.;�;�:;��.g@ �; ��n� �, shouid read "...,��rie f�r a..,' '�:�t��;�;:paragraph 6, lir�e 2:;.�;shouid read �ci'�;:r�t;�`�cres" and line 4 sht�':�t� read "...than �r�:� acre. ." econd: �ra�emie/Stevenson to fh� min,±��s� of October 9, � 996, as 7 aye:s:::::.. 0 t�ays Ti�er°e were na r�sider�t requesfs or comments from the filoor. 3 �egular Me�fi�tg fVovember 6, 1996 Mounds �l��w City Fiall :« > �nd� �li:�ir;� iViN 55112 2f Roil Cali Approvai of IVlinutes: 4ctober 9, 1996 Motior� Carried t. Mounds View Planning Commission November 6, 1996 Regular Meeting Page 2 , Mr. John Sfireeter and Mr. �dward Paster, represenfiing Paster Enterprises, were preseni. Community Development Director Sneldon explain�d �he request from Paster �nterprises for. �pprovaf of a variance in parkirtg raiias, a variance in sign heighf and sign area and a canditional use permit for joint use of parking at 11�ounds View Square 5hopping Center�, �5:��-� 2585 Highway 10. Direcfor Sheldon explained that she would be preseniing th� r�quest from I�ounds View Square in two parfs. The first par� irtcluded Planning Cases 461-96 and 463-96, which ;,.;;:�:;;;; invoived the joint use of parking and a var��; in the required parking ratic�� for Mounc€s��'�iew . Square Shopping Center. She expi�i�ied tha.�,::: the second par4 is Planning Case 4:��-96 regarding a variance in the sigr�>.��'e to al��vv a center identification sign for th�''��oppin�"`;:=� center which exceeds #he ma�#�ium ar��:;��d . Ilo: `. .d hei hfi a b if ��. C ��,:::: :;: 9 : Y Y ::.:..:.:::.::::.:. ........ _ __. The first`��';��t�s�;has fo t��>�'i:�� a��ount of parking req�«e±� �� e s�op�� r expands, addi�€� ��4�p,lc. of n�� s on the property w�t�,i�� sp��;�:eQues� b�ing for an addition�l��,��00 squ�r� ��,t�f retail space which;:�ould be adde�.,��,�;t�:�nd of the bui�d�rig near IVfarios 1��d�� {4,004 square feet of.:_:;€`��ail and 1,000 sq�t�re feet of starage area). ��;added that it is:::�fe applicant's desire, at ��i�:;�ime i� the:;f��re, to remove the existing <: .::::.::.;:. f��i�g��`��t�'� ��;�Hardees Resiaurants and r��7;1��#� �f�� n%ith two dinner house style r�; VVith resp�ct to fhe firsi item (Cases 461-96 and 463-96), Director Sheldon r�oted that ihe P(anning Commission discussed at length at their lasfi meeting wha4 parking would be 4. Public Hearing Regarding Variance Request �rr�m Paster :�nterpr��'e�s, Mounds :::<<'��v�;:�quare ;<:«<:��ir�g Cenfier, `!;;�`��i�#�� Case Nos., <:»:::.; :�::;,<:<:;:. ;; : _»>:; .,.....�`4�:�I::::�.�z::��-9� and;° ;, ; Mounds Vievv Planning Cammission Regular �Vieeting required under the Ciiy's existing Code and whai parking is in place on the siie. She explained that there is a specifiic r�quest f�om the �pplicant for a variance in ihe parking ratios that apply io the property and a requesf for joint u�e ofi parking under a condifiionai use permit. She confinu�d by explaining that joint use �f parking recognizes that some uses are night time uses and some are day time use� and �hey off-sef each ather. She added that the number of parking spaces ort the site at present is 477, and if the new resfaurants and retail space were added, some parking spaces would be eiiminated so that the number of the space� on sifie would be 454. Commissioner Nrilfer inquired if 111, 775 square �eet is a typo:;(��:;;_�;:�;;r: �:. Page 2, 1st paragraph, o� the staff repa��`artd :: she was informed Qhat it should read:<��'1.535..<: �>� �.«:�,. :.ryr � Director Sheidon expiained that:::i�t��s Sta€fi"s ur�derstanding from the F'lanni��`�,�ommi_�s�on at their last meeting that fhe�`�e willin�;;�a �oo�C, at the �xis,��i�g parking ir� ��;�� a� be{r�� adeauate:�� exist�t�� i�� and �X�� that the ��1r��:.did gef �;�Zr��t�s vari��c� to ......................... ..._.... ._.. allow for tl�e:::��<::�ces to`��<;i:€��;�;:for fihe , . .._ ........... .............. . _.. ... existing square;;�c�`�f`��;�., She `�at��i�lu�d by asking wha :,�`�#.i�� ,�� ,e a�pi�� ag�inst ihe new foQ:�'` �'�� #��i�;;ihat the proposal is for::;��1/2 aces pe� � t�(��;:�quare #eet and ih�at;�u'r current codE, r�cju��:s 10 spaCes bui a�i�� that our code i.��;�nuch higher than other j�€r��diciions. She cc��Einued by explaining that �h�;_;r��io prapas�;e&;��r fast food resta�rants is at ��°;:��;��.;.I`.�q�ai�'�menf (1 space for every 40 sq�� c:�i� c�� rlining and 1 space for every 80 sqi��'�'�� f kifichen) buf fhe dinner house resta�trar�� are proposed at 1 spac� far every 80 square Y'e�f 9f dining and 1 space for ev�ry 84 square f�et of kitchen, which she expEained is � more typical ratio for larger restaurants where you have less customer turn-over. November 6, � 996 P�ge 3 ��6'11i/I�v' �'J�`` G� ��r`� �`ii'1i1�' 'd11,, ,� , ;; . . �; Mounds View Planning Commission November 6, 1996 Regular fVlee#ing Page 4 f�irector Sheldon �xplained fio fhe Commissican that Reso(ution No. 4�5-96 is for the new ratios to be used for the proposal, and added that it was Staff's conclusian ihat the variance was jc�stified and approval was recommended. She noted tt�at if the Planning Commission can grant a variance; it would not go on to Council unless the appiicant appealed the Commission's decision. Director Sheidon addressed #he other issu� which had �o do with joinf use of parking. Afi the last meeting, staff had reporfed ihat ihe number of parking spaces an the site, after the building addiiions, would be 457 and that �h�;:;;:>': number which wouEd be required using the;;��; ratios would be 454. The Commission:_>;;:;:r''�� indicated at that time that the applic��'"shou(d;;:: provide the additionaf three space,s;<�y .,:N�'.i restriping some of the s�andard>:�€��`�talls::_�€�`�be compaci size. Director Sheid��;�fi�en in�i�at�d to fhe Commission that Staff t�`�de an �r�;�,_in _. �t�..ao-.: '...: .:.s:., its previou� t�.eport fo fh� �?I�n�iing Cor��(�.;> ; :.>:..::,-. lnstead e� ��.;space� i��ri� �ie�ded, u�� `€��e new rati��;;;��::��paces �!��:c�e�.ed, �r 38 spaces mor� �I�r�_�(`�e numb��- c��>��;,site. She advised th� Cc��i��ic�r.� tha� �� v�� t _._._. __ ..... _. possible to::��i��:;;�i�l�r;a thre�;:;;space reductio�i:<t�r��a 3� sp�c�;��ction using restri�:i�g from stanct��i:;::;�#��;:�talls to compact siz��;�ta!!s. (It would r�qi��e�51 sfandard sp��QS to be restripe�l:::to compact size to c�'��e three additior:�:�f spaces, which was more �f��:;;1:Q% of the �`king an fihe site. ihe _ _.. ._ -: ;:..:. ��'��i��;�.�d�:;�€�ris comp�ct space� to 10% of ff't� ��.rr°� �a�`�vided. } !t was staff's ..................... . . rec�i7ti�ser�i�a�ion fhaf th� Commission consider a conditionaf use permit for joint use of parking faciliti�s to address fihe sifuafson, and reported that ifi would r�quire a 8% reduction in the parking required far daytime and nighttime �ses to reduce fihe parking req�ired on fihe sife to the '".i Mounds View �lanning Commission Regular Nleeiing 454 spaces being provided. Resolution fVo. 486a96 was prepared which lays out �h� �indings #hat suppo�f af lowing joint use of parking at 8 percenf. Commissioner Brasaerr�le inquired if #he variar�ce in ratios wauld resuft in a requiremeni of �92 spaces and wanted tc� verify if the conditional use permit v�✓as needed fo gefi the numb�r dawn to the 454 spaces, which 4he �pplicant is proposing. He also asked if the maximum allowable cross-over beiween nighfi and day use is 50 percent and if Staff was proposing only 8 percent? Commissioher Stev�nson inquired if ther�::��;: any aifierna�ive to the spaces the cenfe�;i`��"� � lasing for the storage area and why i,;-' �'=- OOC; square feet is needed and for wha�;�� ,� :;. {..,...... , -- Mr. Streeter expiained that th��i�`ially ;;;;�;;;`. proposed to expand fihe cent��;�urther ��:;�t�e ., south. ln di��ussions v��i>:�.t��F, it wa�;�iQ#e��;'<; >::; :� that ex�r�� ar� this<�d��`��e�€�<:wou(d c�� _�. more tha� ;ian� ��r of p��€�� ;�:?e lost so they ; reduced th� ��;��t�ion �� s��. �� a� one row of parking. Chair P:e��rson bro�s��:i�� {�� s�gnage at Mari�,�;��ind haw it woi��d<;�: :��ecied by th� add��n. Mr. Streeter<:;��air��d ihat he pr�si�med thaf whoev�r rents fhe new area v�u€� wani to have,�;�or their advertising and it uu�s;;�xpfainec� �h��:;:iVlarios cauld possibly move < ,.. ��t' �nd �,k�� rc�?�'�enani be pufi in befween. Cr��t�rt��i�� b�rf inquired if the new parking CC�iI`I�?#::1��fbf15 iP1�IU��CI tFl@ @II�'lli'latE0r1 ��the 23 spac�s �n the south side of the buiidir°�,q?� Dir�ctor Sheldon explained that yes, she boked at fhe spac�s that were in fi�e expansion area and thai is why fhe parking count was reduced firom 477 to 454, November 6, i 996 P�ge 5 i Mounds View Planning Commission Reg�tlar (�eeting Commissioner Miiler referenced Page 2, part C, of Resofution N�. 485-96, and feels that �dding 5000 square feet io fhe building does result in actions from the applicant and wondered how do we came up with 6000 square ieef for new resiaurants. Director Sheldon explair�ed t�at ihe ratios of our Code creafie a hardship for a shopping center of this size and thai the applicant did not choose fhe rafiio, which she feel causes an extraordinary parking demand. The hardship is caming from the ratio rather than fram the footage proposed by �he appEicanf. She nofied fhat the 600C1 square fe�t for the restaurants came from their plan. Commissioner Brasaemle suggested leau��i�`;:;;;;:; the parking co�n# far the curreni shoppi;.P"��`� cenfer as is, and use the ratios from ;i�i� Code;:::;:: to calculate the amount of parkin�, t�eded f��`� tl�� expansion. He asked what ,p��`�:entag�.;;'�� .,:..: reduction woufd be needed us��i��tfie a#I�anca ;<><:::.: for daytime anci nightYirn� ��;;;fa gei fca;;��t�,.45�: _-: ,:: spaces b�i�3g.,provided �� i�icated f�i�.:��tt�: to addres� �%� �arkinc� ��f�c��. with e��f�� '�� variance::t�`':��>:;�il�wanc�<��;:�� `` �x�n� �nd �:. nighfifime us�;�f<k��>:�ot bot��:i�:pQ��i�f�. ,: Directar Sheldt�� ac��:;,some ��(��ions in , order to an�w�€�'<��rnri��;icner ��sa�mle's :,:::;;::.: questio,r�;��id came c�� €�t; �� percent. Direc.t��Sheidon exp(�E��<��at she believes ifi :::?�: ...:.�.::.:...:. :. is e��ter to show that �ff�:;tFi� ratios fha# there is:`�'�roblem and thaf,�e are fixing it rather than t��'i�i`� the day time/r�Jght time calculaiion. i��ar Sh�idon;��'pl�ined that if yau appfy the ��i��;t�Yi��;;��>;:t�ie square footage this is c#��r��,i�g;, $�� would be 614 spaces required but"i��`�hdt there may be a problem with f�aw the 614 spaces were cafculated. Commissioner Sk�venson inquired as to which time would be the busiest for the shopping cenker? He is cancerned thaf ifi the ratios ar� November 6, � 996 . Page 6 Mounds View Planning Commissior� F2egular NEeefing nat changed and ir�s4ead a r�duction for daytime and, r�igh4time uses is used, 4here would not be enough parking af peak times. Commissioner Brasaemle inquired v�hat would be the fiotal number of parking spaces that would be needed fior the entire c�nter including �he expansion. Dire�tor Sheldon replied that it would be 1,035 spaces. Commissioner Johnstan expressed that he feels that fhis proposal would be good for Mounds View ar�d is for granting this t'equesf b�at it is a matter of how fo do if. Chair Pefierson expressed �k��t he had sii feelings and thinks tha4 the Planning ;;_> Commission needs to lay a more sfiaE�t��J ground-work for any other cases t.��t''�ma� up and he fieels more comforta��:��r'ith th resolutian as prepared whict� kr��tcied fh variance in rafiios. .. Commis�i��'t:o-::�Y��rt : ............. ..... ...... ... with cne'v?��;�ka�F;na� but shar�� fi�� ,�r��r ____ ._ _.__- Stevenson rai�� t��', time mix. H:�:��[��::t�:�� .:<<<.;v:. , see a praE�lem, b�i �� tenar�t�;'�sUCh as a E�ic be �::concern. �;fh�� resoiuiion, . s tha� __€�r�it�I�:stonei _ ......_._._:. ..+,:., ding th� �� rne/night '>r`��hf now��:�� daes not on future �tore, there could �`r�=�fimissioner Bras.��mle nated that he feels _ _. ..... ::«; ��Z�> ��ivantage ta::�:ranting a variar�ce is that ii �c��.;��a�::;e�t�i�fi.��i�a pre�edent ifi the Councii r��r�� fl��;:��r��iiic�r�al use permit and reiracted h�i�`'��ti��l t� �iiminafe the variance. Commissir�ner Miller has concerns with losing the 23 spaces by making the building S,OOO square feet larger when there are already - vacanf retaiE area and wandered i� that mighfi November 6, 1996 F'age 7 I' Mounds View Pianning Commissian R�gular fVleeting char�ge if there were more fraffic. Director Sheldon expiained thai by adding the restaur�nts you may get more inter�st in fhe center. She also added tha� if pe�ple do go out to din�er and then run errands io the other businesses irt the Center, they are still only using one space. Ea�! Har►�il#oat, Sunrise Nlethoc�lsi Church, i6�7 L.ong Lake 1�oad, inquir�d if traffic from ihe Cenfer cou{d acciden#aily overflow ir�to their church parking lot across th� street? He did note that ihey have not had a probl�m as of yet. He is also concerned with the dumping afi garbage into ihe wetland adjacent to the church. Commissioner Miller suggesfed tl:��'::::::<� , signag�, "Sunrise Church parking oniy"_:::�oiald alleviate this concern. .. . __... Moiion/Second: Brasaemle/Broc��s;<�t`o ap ResoEution No. 485-96, as am��i�i�ci, re� ;;:«<: approving a variance r�q�test'`€�� th� par� ratios appli��bie to the,;f��r� Vi�u� �q; Shopp�r��::��r, Pla�t��r�g ��se No. 4�: _ _;; Commissiori�r;:It��J.�r �oted`��r�;��;�rections fio proposed Res�I��,f�C��;;�o. 485 ��;:�,>� (�age 2, line 1, `�result� sh��d:;��ci. r°esuft�,. �} fhird :..>::<::�. -�- whereas;:,;item a, l�r�e ��r�" �t�oula4 read of. :::;:_.. � . ... : : : .... 7 a��s 0 nays I��t�on/Second: Bra��emle/Stevenson to �pp�'�?ve Resolu#.i;Qt��Na. 486-9�, as amended, €��r�i�:�r��C�t�r'iending {this word was added fic�::��;;�`��31;i<�t�ri} approving a conditianal use peri�i'it��i�r'�he joinfi use of parking facilifi�s af fl�ounds View Square Shopping Center, Planning Case No. 461-96. Commissianer Miller r�commended that item 7 of the resafutian may not be necessary. Novemb�r G, 1996 Page 8 Mofiion Carried .; '; il�ounds View Planning Cammission Regular i�ieeting Direcfor Sheid�n stated tY�is ifiem indicates �haf the variance cannot stand by itself. It was then recommended thaf i4em 7 be added as a "whereas" ir�stead. 7 ayes 0 n�ys Director Sheldon explained fihaY the second ::;<::;. part of the request pertains to the signage for the sife. S�e noted fhat there have been some changes in the pr�posal since the last PEanning ` Commission meeting. (At ihis time �irector SheEdan distributed pictures of four ather centers owned by the applicant showing ' exampies of signage}. She explained that �f�`<'';;<; '`;;::;,_ last time this item was befare the Plannin�;�`;�;t:��:�;;;;;:;:;�;<:<;;;;; Commission, ti�e applicant was propos��'�a .;;::: sig� 75 feet high and �00 square f��<:�n �rea,,:.«<=AV .:' which they feli was needed so the, ��pping.`;;::'` center name and fenant names;:��ld app��r° above tt�e bridge. She explai�i��"�fiha� th�:-`�' � '„' Planning C�mmission reques;t�c# inf�rm��i�c� .._}�_;�:'�:4 . ; ; � z �,�. regarding«��w much of.��:;�� woulc�;;��:. ::: � ��` ..:. .:. above th�`.��e and �c�v� �f�� bridg� wc�� >:: look to ��<�'i�#�t�st:_iraveli�t€�;�t�;_��vvay 10: — �'��.-�� Director��xp��d �t��fF�ity �'��i��r did a study on how �i��,;�� c�n wo�(d,I��re ta be ta <. ; appear ove#� �� k�r��g� �� c��sf�� vvhich a motorist:::��iuld frav�#:;�r� �,€�: ��or�ds at 50 mph. {ien :�e�ands was �nr�str��i�:d'tf�e amount of time;:��"would take a m�tor�� t� decide to slow ari�>��urn inia the shop�ir�g cenfier.) The study ��d that if you ��:�`�765 feet back from Long t;;�i��r:_�oa� �nd the:��ign is placed in the area ,.. �€��;4�=;��y �i� �pplicant, then the bricfge will � c.-��r�r�a}� �� '�eei of tY�e sign and fh� sign wilf sho�t ��'�v� fhe bridge railing from 52 feet upwards. �he went on f� �xplained thafi on a 75 foot high sign, 23 �eef wouEd show above the bridge railing ar�d you w�iald anly see #he center identiiication p�rt of fhe sign. She infarmed �h� Commissior� that the applicani is November 6, 1996 P�ge 9 ��rried _.:::....._ i: ;. I;.' f�ounds Vievv Pfanning Corr�mission �Jovember 6, 1996 �eg�alar lVleeting Page i 0 now proposing monumeni signage and � 50' high, 430 square foot identification sign. Signs existing at the Nlendot� and Crystal center� were reviewed and were nofed to be similar to the request beir�g made by the applican�. Direcfor Sheldon went on to explain that onc� yo�a lower the sign, even io 50 feet, you cannot �ee it over the bridge, so from 5fiaff's perspecfiive, you have start�d to lose ihe connection between the bridge and the need far a variance. She expressed a concern fhai granting a variance for a sign of this size wouid sei a prec�dent, and I�ad to other shopping centers requesfing this type of signage whetf��?:c there is a bridge or not. She suggesfed a`>�� ;;;><;;>:;: �>:::.<:> cauple of possible ways io address thi�;#�'sue: �. <:::::: one being to amend our sign reguiatic�ri`s to ;; <>,::� recognize that a shopping center:o.fi�:$his siz�::� � may need more sign�ge ihan we:'��w; th�>��'� other being, the applicar�t cou�c��<�'�q��sfi �<'� .::«<:::.:r: variance for fihe monument sk�t�age at �I�:�::;;,;_ ,.:. : drivewa�� rances bas:��;��>�he imp�;�t �rf;il��:=: ; .: bridge, a�i;�i Y��ue � pyl�,�� f a sizE$ �Y�� : meets i�c-�:�C��:,:�ode. ��;��p�a�n�d that anofher po��tk?%��.�. �uld b� �t�.;��i�iid. our Code to alfow for �"�i�r� p�i;��ge" w��FC�'1 ��touid allow the shoppi<n�: ��r �i�S�€}�rai�ed sign regulaiior��'`which w��;_�i�`�_to be approved by th�:;�lanning Comr�i��'i�:::�'She furfher �x��ied th�t anathe�:�ia�ibility wouid be to . gr��i� a"floating box" .�� signage fram the top of � ::..,. . . �f'��.;�ail�ng up fio fih�.;.�� feet, with a eondition an � th�;;:��ciance that.;�i��bridge must be buiit and � ��ic�: ��;:��;.�;�'�riionths in which to update our si��';;�e�'�€�;��i��is. !f the Sign Code is changed •: fo a�ic�w��ie sign�ge, the "floating box" could no� be usad. Directar Shefdon sugg�sted that perhaps the Planning Commission coufd iable this item untii a firmer proposal is made and more information is obtained from the applicant. _�:, f�ounds View Planning Commission F�agular fl�eeting Cnmmissioner �rasaemle wanted to make ii clear that ihis variance requesi is contingent upo� the bridge being buiit and that whatever variance the Planning Commission passes needs to have this ciause in it. JoArrra C�-!lQen, 26i� Ctarertiy Roa�l, irtquired as to wh��he parking and the sign is a�`t�% co�cem now if w� dan't even know �.��6�e bri �-� or fhe dinner house restauranfs wiil be built? It was explained ihat before the �p�l�ant even considers building the restauranis, they wvuld r�eed to know if adequate parking is �vailable to inform fufure tenants and it is oniy the sign request th�f is:;:;:�!:' related 4o the canstruc�ion of the bridge. :;1�.:��: add�d, thaf i� r�ras easier to come to #h��rr��"� � Planning Commission with both o� fhQ�� items;.;<' .;;:; at once. She also expressed her c.�i�cern ,;:�t:::�� about the construction of a light�;�ign and;:�� with a tall sign being seen froc�;i:?:i��r�windt�. She also expressed conc�rn;��fh other;;:";:��:;�:,. businesse :: .ossibf w :, �i":>� ;>�;>� I ler si ��; :<�` ;; ::::<::�:<`: �:..K�:. Y �r�t:€��.;;t� g::_::..:::. �ar°I d°��g<;�€��r��e ��#��c�� '�c�rc�r, i6�i Lon� �;��,�.��a�d, ex��i�d::�;<�ignage situation that �c�.��p��nced ��;;�_;��sic�ent of the Cify of F�I�ir�� c� fi�� th� bu��ri�ss was required:t��'r�duc;� i�� i:�r��,so that it did nat fiake au�ay from th� su�i��t��ig businesses and;;�omes or they wo.:��` t:�f geY a buifding ��if. _.. ��;�t��_�irn�, John::;��reeter, addressed the f�f'�`i�i�i�;:�;�?��sion showing drawings of o��r �f��€�g �ceniers and explaining their pro�t��t�''si�gn size and location ofi �he pylon sign in respect to 11�ounds View Square. Me explained thai the reques� far Mounds View Square is very simifar to fhe sign and its location as it currently exists at the fl�endot� Shopping Cenfer. He painted out that #he signs fVovember 6, 1996 Page i 1 i; Mounds View f'fanr�ing Commissian Regular N[eeting ar� sized by traffic engineers ar�d engineerir�g firms tha� are in the field of sign design and when they are told #he approximafe location oi th� sign, fihey statisticaliy figure fihe size af fhe sign and I�iters 4o atiract th� attention of passing traffic. He did note that the engi e�rs have not yet been brought infio this casc�� and that 4he ir��ormaiion that is appfied in�his parficular case is based t�n past sign�ge and is approximaie. Discussion continued between the applicant and the Ptanning Commission regarding th� similari�ies of fhe Mendota sign and the proposed sign for Mour�ds View Squ�re. Commissioner Johnston expressed his>::. with the possibilifiy of other Mounds �� Square fenants requesting s�parate��ig for fiheir businesses. He asked,f�i�:�morE ;,::<:::«:::>:.:. information on how a sign pro��n�wou Director Shefdon explained fit�t`shappE� centet�s of �#1i� �ize oft�r� �:a compr�r�;��v��: s�gr� individu�(:�e��''i�;sig sites in ths p��it�;� overafi c�nter icf�r��# allow the p��::<�i��..�.:ti some ha �I��. nai�umenfi sig ��nts or ofher �all signs_ A ; some contro! lors so you g� �ance. A c.��ri nag ��r rk. �e::�c!hich irtcf��f�s ` €�t�a��,for the paci ,�,��t�,�r;�d an sig� ;, ��ie cities �dle s�qns and allow �i;;��t��;��es on pad sites to '�€�<p��kage or program a��r design, lefter styie ��an overail, coordirtated nent was made that � sign a PUD far signs. Commissioner Brasaeml� ' quired about the signage for the other p d � ites at Mounds View Square, specifcally the propased dinner hause restaurants. The applicant responded by saying thai tenants can be. very demanding November 6, 1996 Page 12 Mounds 1/iew Plannir�g Commission �tegular Meeting and usuaily request a pylo� sign, but if #he pad is foo good to pass up they may go with the monumeni sign. Commissioner �rasaemle explair�ed fhaf possibly a monument sign, especially for the �ridgeman's site, may be more suitable and easier to see in this case becac�se of th� propased bridge. We explained that we should address ail the signs, not just the one sign, because if w� deal with each of the other signs individualfy we cnuid end up with something we don't really want. Commissioner C}bert expressed his concern that ifi we approved some type o# sign package, later or� down fihe ro�d ifi may no4 fit with the,,::< ;;;, entire piciure ofi what we are Eooking at fQr:��°i�:<. proposed Highway 10 carridor. Direcfor Sheldon informed the Cotr��ission t�1�i � at the last Cauncil work sessior�;>�:��re was:::v�`` discussion on hiring a consufti��irm �r�;;�;��' � :>.=.:: looking at a section of Hi�hw��'10 tha�:;':I:s;:;;;;;,..,.`-:>::} further fia fil�:_.n�rfih of �/tc�� :�iew Sq��.:;�: <.>; ;; .:. .. :::.::..::�.: ;� Th� Piar�►��t'� �arrrmis��c�r� ��t��ir�d ifi, �a�:'ig�-�: that secgc�C� �� ghway '��; t�� i�nsultant wii[ be laokir�g�-��;t��`design ��i:�;::;��d added if , >.>::. .<.::_:. : ;::.:::.>;::::;::,..:.. ihey ar t�y ��r�i�rt��; bf9 picti:�t�:;t�t��should be a suitable _ :::��:.f��,��;:;�:��(� �e e�t�ticfed furfiher along Hi,��way '9�. '�i��ta�':;�:heldon believes that if::;tC�e Planning Co�i��i[;4��n sefis a good stat�dard on fihis site, �� v�il� be okay on other si�.�ping center sites:>�at propose different :..�: �E�il� C� �. ... >:z>s ��rirr'i��i��r?�r�:��e� again expressed som� c��t��rr�;:��:;:��tr�k� the Plannir�g Commission _. ._ . _ ___ ................ n�� t� �rri�ake sure tl�afi th�se sfandards are se� hic�f� �rrough. Commissianer Brasaemie inquired as to whaf the applicant's general sense �f wha� dinner ��use res�aurar�t tenant feef'tngs are on pylon November 6, 1996 Page 13 fUiounds View Planning Commission Reguiar fVleeting versus mor�ument signage. iV1r. Edward Paster replied that uscaally f€�e tenani wants an identifica#ion sign that separa�es them from everyone else and that monument signage may not always be accepted as the desired signage for their site. He also indicated that promoting the name of the tenanfs seems to now be the trend. He thinks ihat if we have fihe monumeni sigr� near fhe area where the pond and the proposed bridge vviil be located, as Siaff as indicated, it wouEd be innovaiive and a somewhat different approach. He added that i� may take some convincing ihe restaurant ihat if would be adequate, but he would make a real hard sell for going to the monument sign wif�:;;;;;:;>"> the tenant's name on it and efiminaiing th�;;<;;:;«::;;; pylon sign for the tenant. He generalf�r:.�iriks ;' #he concept would work but may be �;`�ery harc�:=` sell. ; ..,... Chair Peterson inquired if th�;�'I�ririing ;;.::�� i•: Commission h�d everyfi�ing ��y need��;::��.:, .,:,: ,: �.:::.;.:.:::::;:::«>:;:: give this c�� further co��tior�. [��Q�:;<;:;':: :: Sheldon �� tim� ir�c��c�;fi�d th�t sh� t��€� from th��'��I�c�r;�k,.� di�g€��, �i��:;shows th� locations wi1�� y,want fi�� t��€�e and afso a drawing �f t#�;� ��r��c�e itsei� ��. �� vhaf the ; package is �'i�t�-�s��s w��f� ;��c va��ice. She ;..�,:,�. � suggeste�l�fhen tr�a� �� f�� '(�nning Comr.X;t��sion is in ac�r��t��:<t�at shopping cen:t�r`s need to be (o�#�e�;>�t again in terms of hc�?r�`:�ignage is handl�d, especially centers this I��'�„ a provision c�t<�be worked on that would ��iQV�;;;fc�r sign p��ges, She indicated #hat �#'i�;:r��;;�pR��:;��ck with the proposal for the �:i��r;;i��i�ation signs which ihe applicant teei'� ��'��'rieeded because of the bridga and can fihen get working on th� overall signage. Corr�missioner Stevenson suggested that the Commission expiore what the signage is of other similar centers alor�g Nighway 10, such November 6, 1996 Page 9 4 �lllounds View Planr�ing Commission 1 Regular fVieeting a� Narthfawn Commor�s and on the ofher side near Rainbow Foods and others in the area. JoAnn �c�lleen, 26�i Coarnfy Road l, inquired as to wh�ther the requesfed monument signage would a[so be locaied at the entra�ce on the north side of the shopping center and Nir. Streeter replied that they had not considered it. fViotion/Second: Mi[Ier/Johnston to 4able �he discussion of the signage for iVlounds View Square until their r�ext agenda meefiing�� d��t. 7 ay�s o nays Direcfor Sheldon req�ested th�t the Plai�t�ing Commission consider caliing #c� orde��ti� their me�iing on i�ovember 20 to take aet��n on tf�; :4.> �' item and it was the Planr�ing C4�`i`r'r��ssion'�;Y>`' <,..:. consensus fhat it woufd be a��ibiiity t�� they would call to order c�nti�€�ent upo�i':;;:; ; receiving t�i�..adequaf� ��rrr��fiion reg;��i�; .;: this cas.��:::<;::::::<:<;:<.: _ ._. . Mr. Jim PrEC� �r� i��r�in Linc��l�l; ��resenting the app{icar�t, ��r�'::I��fopm�r��, were Presen#:::�;;>>��"�� ..... ._ .......� Co�€�riunity Deveiopm��:�i�ector Sheldon r��;iewed the case froii� �aturn Development �;a�€;`�pany for the exp�nsion of the exisfing d;��ship in Mo�r��s View located at 2375 I��iv+��,;� 0.;;;;#��°�cfor Sheldon explained that ��i��„�s ��a�r�`sing to develop the property that is nc�� r;��ied by the CITGO gas staiion at 2395 High�nray 90. She reminded the Cammissian that they did receive a defaiied site plan at their iasf ineeting. She in�ormed the Commission thaf Yhe appiicanf, after r�view of the Staff report, has revised their drawing to November 6, 1996 Page 15 i�n Carried 6. fnformation Meeting Regarding #he Requesfi from Saturn Development to Amend a Conditional Use Permit, 2375 and 2395 Highway 10, Planning Case No. 464-96 �iounds !lievv �'lanning Commission Regufar Meefiing add fihe trash enclosure. She cor�tinued by saying there were two issues of concern; ihe first had fo do with the amoun� of landscaping required Qn the site, and she indicafed that fihey do have sufficient landscaping to meet the ter� percent req�airement, and the other item had to do wifh signage. She explained that Yhe existing site has a pylon-style sign fhat . identifies the dealership and a monumenfi sign thafi idenfifies the used cars and that Saturn is proposing fo add two manument signs at fihe entrances io the deafership, one on County Road N2 and the other a(ong Highway 10, that would be ihe same size as the one existing (8.5 feet high by 5 feet wide) for a tofa! of 42.7 square feet. Sfiaff daes nofi have any obje;c:�i�i��;', to the sign from an aesthefic standpain:i;`'��id th�;;; ordinance indicates that they are wit�r;i�i`�the area aliowed, but the Gode does nc��>�allow f¢��`'�� fhis number or the propased pl��ient of;;<�s�`�'� <..........,; signs. She informed the Com�i��ion th��'�he ,>�;:..;:.; to#a! area of signage permitte�;;an the ��t�:>;:::......::::<`; ailows 1 QQ;;�uare feefi c�F;��l:f`:�igna e;��:;;�:;>;<;;:>' 9 .. 340 fooi::,:<;1;�'`i::�i t� vv�ii�Nt`t�t��s 440 s�;t:�t'�:��=r":;: :... �?� ..._ _ 9 .;: ; ;;:;;:;;; :: _:< ;. � ....... feet. Slz�:��'t�d fh�m ��a� ��:�::existin9 pYlon ; : .... sign is 1(�6 �+�u��'t� ��fi, th� �,�€��r;��::;wafl sign in 50 square fe�f; ;;�r�� '�.�:mflnur'�� .€�n for used cars �s,��:�c��t� fe�i for�� i4al o# 240 square;f�et��wt��ic.r� le��:��1_;Q::square feei. The additi:c�ial monument ��(��t�::�� 85 square feet. Sh�;;i'r�tec! that the Co:��'d�es not address m��iment signs at ert�rances and asked for d��'�tion fram the P1��inir�g Commission ort �I��t:�r signage.,.,��ild be redistributed thraugh �':��:�e,,_b:�use it is less than #he signage a��ci�ec# �� improves haw the site functions. Commsssior�er Miller asked if Satum's request was actuaf{y mare of a directional type signage and Director Sheldon 'n�icafied that Saturn's requesf is for signa e�s �ghtly larger than what is accepted �s ' ctiona( signage. November 6, � 996 Page 16 4 Mounds �/iew Planning Commission Reg�tar Meeting iVc�v�mber �, 9 996 Page 17 Separate from fhe signage, Dir�ct Sheidon ��/��(�� y statied that a!l aspecfs of the plan or the site are fine �nd r� �r�d�ag�fihat the condifiona! use permifi that a!lows them to ` expand #he sife and add the addifiiona! repair ```` ��s,`4}r� :><� :::r>�<>� <:;<�::. services and car wash be approved. `� _ _,; ��:�. �lafrae Johnson, 22�7 County Road I�2, expressed her concern with the existing IigF�ting of fihe deal�rship. She also indicaied fihat when Saturn was built, they said they were going fo have only oif change services and fhey vvere to(d thaf #here would not be any other facilifiies for repair work. Concern with noise from the trucks comin�:::� and going to fhe business park was als�;;>�`� expressed and that ihey have ca!!ecl,;�i�e Cify numerous times but nofihing is ever>;�fone. .. The Corr�mission inquired as W�S CaldSltlg �`2*�CO"tiCE being c�per�>: : )7 �;�Is. J was the:;�ri�r;.�� lighti� times th��!€��i��€�-;is on The app! timers ar night. H�=�ls� inciic requ�s�ed that fihey �ht but they added that ica!!y at 11:� +�� . Q �>�t�at lic a�ie serv ndicaie� aright �r �;: thaf th�;:;;{;i'��;`i�� are an �i�`ity l�ghfi��` is on alf ��i::t�ia�_;�Y�e Police have �p`:�'t��e��f their lighting �►c�t�d that fihey would :`lights go off p. m. ��f��:;;�kri`�;<►�t-l:�f:::�?�:<�aturn Developmenf, p�`��i'��d � ��Cefich show�irtg fhe lighting sfarid�rds for the site and further discussian took place regarding this issue. ��' Chair Pefierson sug�,�sted that ir�/fuiure, in the public hearing not��'�l�at are sent to residents, perhaps we can �nform the residents thaf fihey �i Nfour�ds View Planning Commission Reg�alar I1�eeiing can stop by Ciiy Hal! if they desire to examine the for �ach case. � ��u�� rian OCraft, 5290 Pin��ood Cocrrt, requesfed that perhaps the lighiing can be turned off an hour earlier and suggested that perf�aps they be turned aff around �0:00 p.m. He indicated that he does have many tali trees in his yard that does block much of the lighting, however, same does come through at night. Ne is okay with �dding additional service �rea and lighting, but is requesting that it be turned off earlier and that possibly the service door be kept closed by 9 0:00 p. m. Chair Pet�rsor� expressed his concern wi.�°i;;::;::;;:;:; th� hoiars of operation and Commissio��`IVill� reminded the Gommission that the oci�inal condifional use permit indicat�s fha�;;.�he hou�� of operation shail be fram 7:Oa a�<�:;:'to 1�:E�<� p.m. C?irector Sheldon wante�:;:��>�'riake �;;.;:�ear ,.... � ��g ta the ap�iicar�`v��ai if th��t��:��!:,- conditiona�;:�tse ermifi st��;:t�'�is, that;`t�'�«;<';;:�:;�;« P em io ��:s�'��uld r�o�::�'i�:��i'�:�;in �st��:€#;��`'� P Y:<.;:.;<::<::::<:::;::•<:::::.. 9 p ... :,::.:. .� ., .....,.. ,, p.m. �€�;<:;�.�:��:ir�farmec�:��i�:::��;nrnissio�t th�t there was �� af tim� ��r� ��i�:>service � departm�nf w��,;u�i�a�i;.i'�. P�st ��?.:�:�:�:`m. because �f<:�i'�i� fi�� jfy, bixf� �r�dicated that with add��i�i�ri�( servi��:�a��;;;i�..should efiminate this p�:�f�lem. . . .._ . ,__. �l�,�t� .loirnson, 22��Ce�unty 14o�d N2, ag�� expressed her�;�isappointment because �i�;:��it ahe was,:��amised by the Ciiy Councii < ..: ��.;it �u�a;l�.;j��:��e oif changes anci that is why . i� �a� ��r�v�d. She also expressed concern _ wifif�`'��i`�'fi��ffi� on the County Road H2 entrance fo the seruice area and with th� speakers and paging system. Mr. Price irtdicated that ihe original permiY allows for a paging system, buf does na4 aliow piaying music and th�y have nofi done that. November �, 1996 P�ge 18 `i Mounds View Pianning Commission Regular il�eeiing Cl�air Peters�n expressed 4hat he is pie�sed wiih Safurn's operation and unti! this evening had not heard of any coretplainfs. Nfr. Price again expressed fihat the reasnn fhey are requesting the expansior� is due to cusfomer demand. Commissinner Stevenson inquired as ia wi�at the applicani's fim� frame is regarding the expansion. The appiicant indicated ihat it would prob�bly take piace in th� Spring bui that they need to ciose on th� land because fhere are tanks on the ClTGO property. These tank� �� are not leakir�g now, buf ihey want to remove;:;�;;;;; .�` as soon as passible so they v� �1:��«; on the property as soon as possible. �_� ��,�, , ��:«<>;: `}� �.4v:: Commissio asaemle expressed:;�afi he :;;{;��`�� unclerstartds the concerns of the«��ident Ut - <>� ><��r;:. �:;�» he does think this deyelopmeri�;€��good f�€°'� ;:::;. Mounds View and th�t Saturr�::;dt�es ha��<�:;>,.. _::.:;: Jood re u��tio�, and he:��a�i:;€�:;ccancer�'�;;v��;t�t:;«;`: P :.::.:::::>;. the envir��t'��'cifal ct�< <=<»;<<'><,;<es��:.�xistin<,;,;; _`��=>:`.,:: ...... r�� csf�� sta ion ��3±� tt��€�e tar�ks �'�b�k��.ve r�c�f be upgr��ci;;��; proba `�i� ��II �t�;�e � �.i upg ded tc� cu�'eCtt ��r�da ds ; ;� �. i 'ri� : � ., r:A: �:,� �g � . 5�YF`-i f � ,z, ,? a .., ll �J 1l �di>'�;y;/i Ub':7 (Commis�at�ner Brorr�s f��f;�� 9:30 p.m.) Cha��;�Peterson asked;:t�iP:r�j��licant if it is na�i�ai noi to have g��pumps ai the Saturn g��y'? i1�r. Price indi�cated ihafi ihey do not �i�sf��;_:��s pump:s>;��`any of their stores because �f: �!�<��ial��€�`'�iih tanks. Corrit��sioiier f�iller inquired as ta how we addr�ss the concerns of the adjacent prope�ty owr�er and with fhe promise of the Council th�t there would be oil changes only? Director Sheldon responded by s�ying thai ihe applicant has the righf to apply for fhe expansion. November 6, � 99� Page 19 Mocsnds View Planning Commission Novemb�r �, 1996 Regular Meefin9 Page 20 Commissioner Br�saemle recommended that ihe Council address this issue sinc� fihey made the promise and because th�ey wi[f ta�e fir�aE acfion an this request. Chair �eterson reminded the Commission that a couple of years ago ihere was an application made for another service facilify in EV�ounds View and a� part of the process, a model set of guidelines was pufi together for services ar�d hours ofi operation and perhaps we cauid review these guicieEines. Commissioner Brasaemle asked ihe resident at 2287 County Road H2 whafi it was like when:::<>�:::�:::: Loose E s� as on #he site as far as par.�[�i�:<�:ti�> and iight ng? The residenfi indicaied tf��``il�i'e . :;; � lighting not as bright but parking.;�Pid hou�� of operation were a problem. ,� ,,, Commissioner Niiiier indicated��`i��"in � original condi�ional use p�rm��`�#`was s only minor.;: ��airs and rr��;��iance �t alfow�d:<€��;;��i�:;exc(udi�t�; ��j�_engin� overha��;�'��i5i'�Issiort re��i�nf, ar�d body , .:.::: ;:.;;.;.;;;::: :: ._ .. . work. l�ire�ft��;;;�;i��dan ir�dt��;::t��#_ #his has ... been repEac.eci �ttl� �;;i�,�v�r eondi��r� �iich is noted on Pac�� f c�� t'�;��at�a�� t� ��3-96. Direc#�a��Sheldon rerri��::;:Yf�� Commission fiha�;�ti�i� item is in fror��:;��i� Commission for ��cir� t�is evening ari:tl` indicated that the �i,��i�ge issue is not<:i�tcluded in the proposed ��:;�;c�;l;t�tic��, and w:!�;it`d need to be addressed af �_l��e�:�l��;�:::;�3�t��tor S�eEdon noted that the ; ,:: ��i�t� �ieeded to take acfiion this evening ir� are�� r �f�is case to be heard at fhe Cify Cauncil on November 25. !f was concluded that the concerns with the lighiing broughfi before #he Planning Commission this evenir�g were with t�e origina! i Mounds View P{anning Comr�ission Regular Meetir�g iighting. Direciar Sheidon at this time recited ihe section on "glare" in the Zor�ing Code which indicates that any lighting used to iilumir�afe �ifi-� street parking shall be arranged to deffect light �way from adjoining residential proper�y and ihat the source of the iighting shall be hood�d or confrolied. She indicated �hat the Code gives a measuremeni ofi how much (ight is to be at the prop�rfy line and that these measurements will tell you if direci rays are going off the site. St�e indicated that the measurements of the Safiurn facilify show that the light levels a� fihe property iine are wifhin the limits in the Code, although you may stili b� ab(e to see the point af light and our Code d�.�� not control ihis. :.... .... .... Commi�sioner Skeven�on point�d ou�;;��iat � - the expansion, it wiil not increase,.f��'existi '` amount of light. ._...._. ` -T Eiain� Johnson, 22�7 C�u��'Ro�� expressed;,�ncern with,;�1y::�;`iey werE notified::�t�`�r�j;;��rk se��e�t;`:i��eting. Shefdan ��€r��d that t��P��t�t�n� Commis�ior�_;��;:�c;�:;�pRrt�vin�;;�i;i;;�;;��r�, and fhat > s-: fihey are �nly r'r�� ;., r�c�m��t�d��ion to th� City Counci�.;:;:;:��i�;:�a��i��::�xp[airs�d t�afi fii�e City is n4��equired �c�.g��,.�r�� r�otice ai fihe PEanni�tg Commissic�ri;;;��;;;:�nly of tt�e City Ca�;t�cil public he�rin�t _ai�d�th�t we have r��r�t}y added nofice�;'at the Planning �:t�€i;�rnission level ta�<�t°iake sure residents are €t��c�ri��c� eariier.iz:�;;�''i'e process. She added that �u.�.�c��l�;;�r��i:fy;-i�sidenfis of the wark session ��i�,�i;,�r�.�� :i��1i��ted fihat the Ciiy mainly wanis to m�k� �tai�� eople are here for the meeting where the decision is made. Chair Peterson asked Director Sheldon fo review the conditions contained in �rop�sed - Resolution fVo. 4�3-96. Director Shefdon noted November 6, 1996 Page 21 0 Mounds View Planning Commission Regular iVieeting ihat some of ihe items were braught in from the original conditior�ai use permifi and sorne were new. Commissioner Sfevenso� requested thai in item 1 of fhe canditions that a F'ark Fund Dedicaiion fee requirement be added. There was brief discussion on procedures �f replatting of the property or per°haps vacating fihc� fof line and also requiring a park dedicafiioe� fee.. Direc#or Sheldon indicated the Staff's reasan for the condition is thaf we need fio deal witl� ti�e Buiiding Code and the questian of setbacks because this property inciudes thres I�ts, but it was not Sfaff's intent io rai5e fh� :::<;; : issue of park declication. She indicated fiF��<:';;::';:: she would consUit with aur City Aftorn��;;:�� regarding the proper procedures for ;t-�moving: �; the lot line and with the Buifding Qi��ial regarding Building Cade requir�t�es�fis, Sh:�'��~ suggested tnat the condition k�:;�:�viiord�d��o say priar io ti�e issuance �f ��i�`�gradin�<�r:; :: ..<< buiiding p�(`;mit�, the pr�p,�� ;�wner sl��::;; <': `';` :;:: vacat� t�� i�� l�ne bef�tv�� 5 and "�'�8� ° Highw�jt��,� t�d��rr�@d n��>by the City AttarneY- ._. Commissior�t ��5�€� t��ied t�� t�� conditia�;:�egarding ��:i�i;t�� welding on the sifie b.�:removed from"�?�� '��I�i�tion. �c��r�/S�cond: Mi11e��Peterson approved F��t�f��i�r� No. 483�:��6 recommending �p��ua! af an a[x�rscied conditionaf use permit ��.:;�:�;�:��;l�a��it review for the expansion af ;: ,:. f�� t�r��: ��iership at 2375 and 2395 �fig�iv��`�`a, Planning Case No. 464-96- f 7 November 6, 1996 F'age 22 Motion Carried Sfaff Reports/ Information Items 5�yes 0 nays 1 abstenfiion `�' "��;�,�- !`'��C�ti � Niounds 1/iew Pianning Commission Regular Nleeting (Commissioner Stev�r��n�'� bsiained due io his son being emp(oyed a`t� he Saturn Dealership,) Chair Peferson informed the applicant that this item wi[f be heard by fhe City Courtcil on November �5: Planning ,4ssociate �ricson provided an update on Planning Case No. 460-96: Auto Center which was heard at the October 7, 1996 meeting. He �xpiain�d that he contacted the applicants to inform them of #he C�mmission's cancerns with fihe sif� ar�d Staff's r�cammendations, and the applicanfs indica$�� that the�'e were problems with fihe lease ar��;<:>:<;:::` iherefiore, they asked for the case to be;;;put�or� ,:_. hold and so if was removed from the:<�tivemb�� 6 agenda. Mr. �ricson added that ��is weel�:;:��` the applicants indicated that the�`�:':j� a '��"� ««v possibi(ity fiha4 it may now go t�i�tiugh and�`;�o requested � rr�eeting wiifih St��o go o�r��°��e Plannin C,��;Z`tf1'1f5SEOf1's::r�:" u[��ment�.:� � �: :. :< .... .... ::.: Coir�ctde�;��r, �� ad � t��t��c�;wifih Ni��r�:�� . Bank, w�t�f� ��ts..tf�� si��, ;�s��;�s�s�ibE� b�y�rs : that had a v�t�r;��mi#��° prc�po,��f �� t�e same ;. _ _.... location. H� a�so;::r��:.that t�i�::��1�`o�Fered . _ ..._. ____._ ....... __._.._. ........ _.. ..._ . the prape�t�::��>��►�:;�;�;::i�u� af��r:��eing that the pro�;��tiy had a fic��:;i'�t�t��::�nierest, fhey pulied;<;back their offe�:;;:;;;�i:�:��#icated ti�at Caihy ��r��i�tt, our Economi�<;:E��;u�lapmenf Cc��inator, was prep:aring a resofution for the ��:�auncil to auth�3t�ze Staff to negotiate :� ��i�'�:I�se of fh� ��perty if the bank chan��,��,�s , :<.::... . , ��r�d �r�dfi;;�� ain, offers it ta fihe ,-��.,_.__ _____-�..___-w__ Corrirriui�i�y Dev�lopment nirector Sheldon informed the Planning Commission of ifems that are scheduled to be �eard at iheir nexfi meeting; th� variances on fihe signs for Paster Enterprises and for Saturr� Development, a lot split requesfi firom Larry Beach, and a drafi November 6, 1996 Page 23 Nlour�ds 1/i�w P(anning Commission Regular N9eeting ordinance regarding the telecommunicafions issue. [�irector Sheidon informed fihe Commission that she had learned from church officials #hat the New Apostolic Church's purchase contracfi for the properfy locafed a� 3025 County Road W was no longer vaiid and th� appfication for building a church at that location was denied by the Council based on the fact that there was no purchase agreement in place. She afso indicated fhat there is a rumor #hat fhe property has been soid to a person who plans #o fix up the hoc�se, then eventualiy fear ifi down #o build a new house on the site but that there is som�:`>;: confusion as to who actually has ihe rights`;��: >; se!! the property. , The ardinance on revised s�te siz�.s.,';�ind ::;:��<::�> setbacks for churches and othe�;i�i�-resid...�r'itial :;:<.:;. uses will be on Counci! agenc#s�;ftsi� fir�t r.��ing and public hearing at fheic m��ting on ;;';;<<<;:;`:.. Movemb�r«:'i>�. She ask�,d;fh,�;>Commi�;��r��i��;;>�� any of t��t �t�uld like �� er'�ci fhe m��o , represet��;;�i�;:�?�;��ning `��r�t�i��r�. Commissio��t:;(��..indica��.:t��:;�e would e there. , It was alsa''nofied t�i��:;:�3�f}�::��.rnmiss Ober�:::a�id PVlil�er atfien`��<:��'�ouncii work ses,��i�n on November��<'fc�;�epresent the Nl�i�ir�g Commissiort;�i�garding commur�ication :»� ka��er� commissio:��: Commissianer Obert ��i��E�fi�d fh�t �cz�iimissioner Miller made a �� a�?€�;�r��ation but that fhe Cauncii was u�€��c�r��r� �nd,expressed his concern wifh the"c�r�imu�ic�tio problem. Director Sheldon suggested ihat thi item be discussed at fhe retreat thai wiii be s heduled between Staifi and the Ciiy Council. �� 9. l November 6, 19J6 Pag� �4 Chair�erson artd I�lanning �:orr�missioners �;i��or�s Adjournment tl�ounds \4iew Planr�ing Commission F�egular Meeting Direcior Sheldon stafied thaY sh� had included th� latest issue of the "Planning Commissioners JournaP' in their pacicet. 'Chair Peierson nofied the members present at the Octob�r 23, � 996 speciai meeting, w4�ich inciuded Commissioners i�ill�r, Ob�rt, �raoks, Stevensor�, and Chair F'eter�on. (Commissioners Johnston and �r�saemle had excused absences}. Planning Associate Ericson was also present. �� Commissi ner Johnston brought up a concern regarding conditionaf use permit that was approved for Colonial Viflage Mobile Home,.t,;:;.;:; Park appr�ximately one year ago which al::l€�� .::;::::.r � them io sell homes. He indic.ated that �;i:i�` �ermit should be coming up for revie��``� �� informed the Cammi�sion fihat Fte,h�i��receiv�i�� e..:"i, '.v'v com�laints regarding the Park �t�i�:;�dded:_��t <::�., ><<.>,:. there are people in the park tf�f�are unh��py about it. � , ,.:. . . There b�i:r�:;;;�i�;furthe�;;�;�si�� befor ,_: Planr�i€�� t�rt��sion, ��i� #��rsor� adjourned `ti�t� ��i��tr�g �f 1 �� <n� ,,_. Ify submitted, November 6, 1996 Page 25 Pamela Sheldon Community Development Director Item ��5 , Q��' �� L��s �� IV�eetyr�g I)atea November 20, 1996 Sta#� �tepor� bye Pamela Sheldon, Community Development Director �'lae�ning Case 462-96 File I�io.: R�questo The applicant, Mounds View Assoc. LLP, is requesting a variance in the City Sign Code to allow a center identification sign for Mounds View Square which exceeds ihe area and height requirements, and monument signs at the driveway entrances on Highway 10 and at the interseciion of Long Lake R.oad and Highway 10. Pe#��ionea°e I�oc��io►�: ;+' :i� ° , Zoreing/��nci Usee Appt►cab[e l�e��lations: Attacf�aner►ts: Background: Mounds View Assoc. LLP 2535-2585 Highway 10 07-3 0-23 -11-0079 B-4 Mounds View Square Shopping Center The regulations applicable to this request are stated and discussed under the analysis section of this report. Diagram oipylon sign Diagram of monument signs The City of Mounds View is pursuing the construction of a pedestrian bride over Highway I0. It will span the haghway just west of Long Lake Road. The applicant is concerned that the bridge will obscure the identification sign for the shopping center. The City is endeavoring to obtain an easement from the applicant for the ramp. The applicant is reluctant to grant such an easement without' the City addressing the possible obstruction to the visibility of the shopping center which might he created by the bridge. Staff suggested to the applicant that they apply far �. variance based on a visual simulafiion of the bridge and its relation to the shopping center identification sign. This report serves as a supplement ta the staffreport prepaced for your October 9, 1996 a.nd November 6 meeiing. (A copy ofthe previous staffreport will be available at your November 20 meeting for the Planning Commission's reference.) Planning Commission 4b2�96: Mounds View Squ�re Signage November 20, 1996 Page 2 Analysis/ Recomreiendatione StaflFobtained a diagram oFthe sight lines from the Ciiy Engineer. The City Engineer has estimated that 10 seconds are needed for a motorist to see the shopping center pyion sign and reaci in sufficient iime to tum at the Mounds View Square, based on the 50 m,p.h.. speed limit on Highway I0. Tn this a.mount of time, the car will travel 765 feet. This distance was measured froen the intersection of Highway 10 and Lang Lake Road, which puts the car at 919 feet from the base of the bridge and approximately 1550 %et from ihe proposed location of the sign. At this distance, the bridge would cover the lower 52 feet of the sign, given the angle of view. (A copy of the City Engineer's study was presented ai your last meeting.} The applicant's original proposal was for a sign 75 feet in height and having a sign area of S00 square feet. At this height, 23 feet will show above the bridge. The panel identifying the center wouid be visible but not the tenant names. The applicant has submiited a revised proposal which consists of the following: a center identification sign 35 feet high by I4 fee� wide, with a sign area of 322 square feet two monument signs, measuring 12 feet high by 18 feei wide, to be piaced at the dr�veway entrances onto Highway 10; each sign has an area of 216 square feet; the area with words is approximately 100 square feet. a monument sign at the intersection of Highway 10 and Long Lake Road, to be determined when the bridge is completed Diagrams are enclosed which illustrate the first two types of signs. At your lasi meeting, the Planning Commission requested more information on the type of signage atong I�ighway 10 and pictures of the signs at Mendota Piaza. These pictures will be available at your meeiing on November 20. A brief summary follows: Northcourt Commons: Signs use briek columns with tenani names spanning between these supports and the shopping center's name across the top. The tenant names are approximately 2 feet wide. The sign is approxima�ely 26 feet ta11, 15.5 feet wide. The area with words is appro�mately 130 square feet. Northtown Mall: Entry signs are approximately 10-12 feet iall, and trian�ular in shape wl�ich helps cut mass. Signs are constructed of stone and carry only the name of the shopping cenier. Unable to measure or estimate center identi�ication si�n but have pictures. Planning Commission 462-96: Mounds View Square Signage November 2d, 199b Pag� 3 Northtown Village: Center identif�catian sign is appro�cimateiy 62 feet high and 21 feet wide. Tenant names are Sab feet wide. The area with words is appro�mately 6i3 square feet. Sfgn constructed of split face block and brick. Birch Run Station (across from Maplewood MaII}: Has a monument sign at the entrance from �eam Avenue which is approximately 25 feet tall and 14 feet wide, wiih a sign area of 280 square %et. IVlendota Plaza: ihere are two signs, one facing Hi�hway 1 IO and one facing Dodd Road. The larger one is on Highway 114 and is set back approximately 150 feet from the edge of #he roadway. (This sign measures 50 feei tall and has a si�gn area of 430 sq.ft.) It does not appear large in context. An�iysis/ Recomanendataono The center identifieation sign proposed for Mounds View Square fits wittun tne Sign Code `, requirements which allow for a pylon sign that is 35 feet high with a sign area of 340 square feet. Thzs sign does not require a variance. Staffwould recommend that supports be b�ick to ma�ch the center's architecture and the pcopos�d materials for the monument signs a� the entrances. The monument signs at the driveway entrances and at the intersection of Highway 10 and Long Lake Road would require a variance. The applicant is proposing that they be constructed of brick. We do not have information on the color scheme or how the signs will be iighted. We are unclear if the signs wiIi be double-sided. If the monument sign at Long Lake Road and Highway �0 is simiiar in size to the two proposed at the driveway entrances, the three signs would add approximately 300 feefi of sigr�age (100 square feet per sign) on structures measuring 216 square feet each. The applicant feels that this signage is needed to alert motorists to the shopping center and the driveway enirances, since ihe pedestrian bridge wili obscure th� view of the retail buiiding from Highway 10 until motorisfis travel under the bridge. The applicant has indicated that the evening commute is most important to them in terms of capturing shoppers, and ii is ihis east to west direction that is blocked by the bridge. Two issues need to be addressed before dealing with the signs themseives. It appears that the signs at the driveway entrances are in the highway right-of-way,. and they wiil also cause a sight distance problem for motorisis exiting the shopping center. The signs need to be relocated far er�ough back to allow motorists' safety. If ihey wiil be in highway ri�htmof-way, ihe applicant would need to provide the City wiih evidence of permission from MaiDOT. Planning Commission 462-96: Mounds View 5quare Si�age November 24, 1996 Pa�e 4 intended to overcome th� blocking effeci of the bridge, not oniy of sigrrage but af the shopping center building afso. {It shauid be noted that because of the �hape of the center, only about 1/4 of the front face--from Budget Liquors to the Hypnosis Center--is visible to Highway i 0 when traveling west without the bridge in place, until you drive pasi the point where the bridge will be tocated.) V6�e have estimated that the sign %r Ivlinnesota Center (shown in a picture submitted by the applicant) is approximaiely 10-12 feet high. The entrance signs a.t Northtown are approximately 10-12 feet high. The proposed sign for Mounds View Square will iook more massive than a sign such as the one at Northcourt Commons because it is a solid wali. We would recommend that tfie signage at Mounds View Square oniy be allowed at 12 feet if a shorter wall is extended the base of the sign or either side, earth is bermed up behind the shorter wail and tied into landscaping to soften the effect. Trees should also be planted behind the larger part of the waii. The Planning Commission will tzave to use its judge�nent as to whether the dimensions requested are the minimum necessary to overcome the blocking effect of the bridge. A ten foot by 15 foot sign may be sufficient. Siaff would also note that the size of ihe monument sign at Long Lake Road and Highway 10 may need to be adjusted in height and size so it coordinates wiih the design of the bridge, The criteria for approval of variances to the Sign Code are stated below with comments from staff as to how this groposal meets the cri�eria. a. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to the properiy which do not apply generally to o�her properties in the same zone or vicinity and result from lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over which the owners or the property since the effective date hereof had no control. c. That the special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. The property is developed with a retail building that is L-shaped and set back from Highway 10. The City is proposing to construct a pedestrian hridge acrass Highway 10 at Long Lake Road which will block the view oi a portion of the front face of the shopping cenier and its center identification sign until motorists travel �ander ihe bridge. The monumeni signs proposed at the two driveway entrances wilI alert motorisis to where io turn in the most etiicient way possibie, since they wiIi be at the roadway edge and more at eye level. They wilI compensate for the Iack of visibility of the center. At present it is very difficult to find the driveway entrances into Mounds View Square at night. The. monument sign at the intersection of Long Lake Road and Highway 10 wiil provide signage in advance of ihe bridge structure for motorists traveling west, which is needed since the bridge rxriil biock the view of the center iden�iiicatzan sign. Pianning Commission % 462-96; Mounds View Square Signage November 2a, I996 1°age S d. That granting the variance requested wili not canfer on the appticant any special privilege that is denied by this Title to owners of ather Iands, structures or buildings in the same district. g. Circumstances under which ihe literal inteepretation of the provisioe�s of this Title create an undue hardship on the applicant. Economic hardship may be a circumsEance for issuance of a vanance. The Sign Code allows iar tenant identification signs and one pylon sign ta identify the overall shopping center, The construction of a pedestrian bridge will blocic the visibility of both the tenant signage and the pylon sign for Mounds View Square until motorists have traveled under the bridge. The visibilit� of other shopping centers in Mounds View will not be impacted by the bridge construction. All other properties which abu# Highway 10 have clear visibility from the highway and are no� obscured by overhead structures. The impact on Mounds View Square will be the most significant due to the angle of the highway, the layout of the shopping center and the position oiihe bridge. e. That the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. f, The variance requested would not be materiatly detrimentai to the purpose of this Titte or to other property in the same zone. The appIicant has requested three monument signs, measuring 12 feet tall and 18 %et wide. One is proposed to be located at the intersection of Long Lake Road and Highway I0, in advance of the bridge structure #o a(ert motorists ta the upcoming shopping center, and two at the driveway entrances from Highway 10. The signs are needed because ihe center identification sigz� will be blocked by the bridge from motorists' view when they travel fram east to west on Hi�hway 10. The size of the signs is approximately half the height of monument style signs along Highway 10 and elsewhere used as the sole identificatian for shopping centers. The signs at the driveway entrances are needed to provide a unmistakabie visual signal at the roadside, close to eye level, of the presence of the shopping center since motorists will have less reaction time than if they had an unimpeded view of the center identification sign traveling toward Mounds View Square on Highway 10, With the design requirements in the conditions attached to this variance, the signs wili be tied into the landscape and be l�ss intrusive. StRff Recornrs'er�datior�: Approval of the attached resolution ;ranting a variance in sign requiremer�#s for Mounds View Square, to aitow three monument signs measuring with conditions. cc: John Streeter, Paster Enterprises, 2227 Universiry Avenue, St. Paul MN 55114-i677 FAX: 646-1389 � � �� :t; �" , 1 � �. � � ��: � � :1�; _ ,1� `� : � � ��: '�� ; ;e, , �, �, � i ,:� 1= 1; �- , , :� . :: � . . , � r � •. . .� � ;} � � � , �. . � , �, .. , . ,, ;, � ;��-._ : .; . . � :: , r� � �:. � i,. . f. „; � r � � :, ,;�,,,r , � : : :, i , r � �, WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planninb Commission has reviewed the request from Mounds View Assoc. LLP for the construciion of three monument signs at the Nlounds View Square Shopping Center, with iwo of these signs to be piaced at the driveway enirances from Highway 10 and one of these signs to be placed a,i the intersection of Long Lake Road and Highway 10; and, WHEREAS, the applicani has proposed these monumer�t signs to each be I2 feet in height and 18 feet in width, for an area of 216 square feet; and, WHEREAS, this property is in the Be4 zonin� district, which allows 100 square fee� of signage for eac� tenant, and a 340 square foot pylon sign; and, WHEREAS, the City of Mounds View is proposing to construct a pedestrian bridge across Highway 10 just west of Long Lake Road; and, WF�REAS, the position of the bridge will block the view of a portion of the shopping cenier's face and its center identification sign from view by motorists traveling on Highway 10, from eas� to west; and Wf�REAS, the heaviest traf�c in the east to west direction is evening, homebound commute traffic, v�fich motorists are more likely to stop to shop than znotorists traveling to work; and, �,,��,��,. WI�REAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the criteria used to evaluate vaxiances from the Sign Code as stated in Section 1008.11 and does hereby make the foliowing findings: Exceptional or eYtraordinary circumstances appiy to the property which do not apply generally to otl�er propertzes in the same zone or vicinity and result from tot size or shape, topography or olher circumstances over which ttie owners or the property since the effective date hereof had no control. c. That the special conditions ar circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicanC. The property is devedoped with a retail building ihat is L-shaped and sei back from Highway I0. The City is proposing to construct a pedestrian bridge across Highway 10 at Pianning Commission Resolution No. 484996 November 20, 1996 Page 2 I.ong Lake Road which will b1QCk the view of a portion of the front face of the shopping center and its center identification sign until motorists iravel under the bridge. The monument signs propased at the two driveway entrances will alert motorists to where to turn in the most efficient way possible, since they will be at the roadway edge and more at eye level. They wi11 compensate for the lack of visibility of the center. At present it is very difficult ta find tke driveway entrances inio Mounds View Square at night. The monument sign at the intersection of Long Lake Road and Highway 14 will provide signage in advance of the bridge struciure for motorists traveling west, which is needed since the bridge will block the view of the center identification sign. b. The literal inEerpretation of the provisions of this Title would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the saine district under the terms of this Titie. d. That granting fihe variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this Title to owners of other lands, structures or buildings in the same district. g. Circumstances under which the literal uxtecpretation of the provisions of this Title create an undue hardship on the applicant. Economic hardship may be a circumstance for issuance of a variance. • The Sign Code a(lows for tenant identification signs and ane pylon sign to identify the overall shopping center. The construction of a pedestrian bridge will bloe� the visibility of both the tenant signage and the pylon sign for Mounds View Square until motorists have traveled under the bridge. The visibility of other shopping centers in Mounds View will not be impacted by the bridge construction. A!1 other properties which abut Highway 10 have clear visibility from the highway and are not obscured by overhead struetures. The impact on Mounds View Sc}uare wili be the most significant due to the angle of the highway, the layout of the shopping cen#er and the positian of the bridge. e. 7hat the vari�nce requested is tlae minimum variance which wouid alleviate the hardship. f. The variance requested would not be materially delrimental to the purpose of this Title or to other properiy in the same zone. ,�;..�;; , ;c: � �_. The applicant has requested�hiee trionument signs, measuring 1 Z feet tall and 18 feet wide. One is proposed to be located at the intersection of Long Lake Road and Highway 10, in advance of the bridge structure ta alert motorists to the upcoming shopping center, and two at the driveway entrances from Highway 10. The signs are needed because the center identification sign will be blocked by the bridge frotn motorists' view when they travet from east to west on Highway l0. The size of the signs is approximately half the height o#`monumer�t styte signs along Highway 10 and elsewhere used as the sole � Planning Commission Resoiution No. 484-96 November 20, 1996 Page 3 identificaiion for shopping centers. ihe signs at the driveway entrances are needed �o provide a unmistakable visual signal at the roadside, close to eye levet, of the pr�sence of the shopping center since motorists will have less reaction time than if they had an unimpeded view of the center identification sign traveling toward Nlounds View Square on Highway 10. �1ith the design rec}uirements in the conditions attached to this variance, the signs will be tied into the landscape and be less imn�sive. NOW, TI-i-iEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the IVlounds View Pianning Commission aciing as the Board of Adjustment and Appeals does hereby approve the variance reques� of Mounds View Assoc. LLP for three monurnent signs, with one sign to be piaced at each of the two driveway entrances from Highway 10, and one sign to be placed at the intersection of Lo�g Lake Road and Highway 10, subject to the follawing conditions; � fC � �� ti��`�t , t �� 1�LJ�� ;.�: This variance is bezng granted in recognition of the anticipated construction of a pedestrian bridge using a spira! ramp design at the intersection of Long Lake Road and Highway 10. The signs permitted by this variance shall oniy be constn.icted after commencement of construction o�the pedestrian bridge, and only if the bridge uses the spiral ramp design. The applicant is responsible for obtaining sign permits from th� City prior to construction of the signs. , �<< _ �_ t �', M1,,� �.,,r `a� � �-' �°s,,,?�,,; �, � ,,_L ,.:�_ r The two signs at the driveway entrances shall consisfi of a mor�ment style sign or "sign wali" constructed of brick and measuring I2 feet in height_anci I8 feet in width This "sign wall" shati have an added wail extension on either side approximately four feet in height and 8 feet in length, finished with a capstone as is shawn for the sign. The sign wall and wall extensions shall be curved, to reduce the appearance of its mass and to approximate the curvature af the driveways. Earth shall be bermed against the backside of the sign wall and the wal( e�rtensions,� to approximately 3 feet fram grade. Landscaping shail be planted behind the sign, to include at least three trees in a cluster, and also in front of the sign. The landscaping may he designed to remain low in front af that portion sign having wording. The final design of the sign wall and sign extensions, and the iandscaping plan shail be subject to approval by the Director of Community Development prior sign pernuts being issued and landscapin� being installed. The brick shall be the ... �..�.. �.�� ,,- same colar as_is used _for the retaiI buildin� unless the colot_cr_e�tes-tea-dark-af a back��n� f�r_i��i�n�ge to be seen. The applicanfi may propose a difFerent coior compati6le with the e�stang brick used in the shoppir�g center, _sub�eci,�o approval by the Director,of Community Development prior to issuance of sign_ , perrriits. 3. The sign at each driveway entrance shall be locafied on the northwest side of the �. , driveway�more or iess as shown in the diagram submitted with this appiication. � �-.�.,�� - Prior to issuance of any sign pernvts,.however, these si�ns at the driveway ��ll � f �'.1 i, .� ��.= . Planniiag Commission Resolution No. 484�96 November 20, 1996 Page 4 entrances shall be relocated further to ihe north to aliow sufficient sighi distanc� __ ____ .___ .____._ _ .__ _. _ .. _... . , � ��` j, for nnotor�sts e�tzng firom the shoppmg cen�er onto Highway I 0. The applicant .� - -- _, . . . _ `�- n\� �� shall provide evidence of permission from MnDOT to locate the signs iri the C'-'�� . highway right-of-way, or relocate the signs so they are the shopping center's _.. �____w_. _ _ __ property. _ _ -r.,.�.__ �� 4. For ihe signs at the driveway entraaces, no more than �V3 of the sign wall may be used for wording (i.e. thai portion of the wall face which is 1� feet x 1 feet) as measured using rectangles arour�d each business's name an� �ie shopp�g center's __ ---- ., ��,� name. Letters shall not exceed(irtfoot 6ii�ches in height. No wording may appear ? �-- �- on-i(�e wail extensions. All lettering for tenan�s names shall be uniforzn colar; the , �� • lettering for the na►-ne of the shopping center may be the same color or a contrasting color. Lettering may be internally illuminated or the sign may have indirect illumination from ground lighting. Any ground lighting shall be shielded so light rays are directed to the sign, bui the light source is not visible to the street or parking area. 5. Signage shall be limited to the name of individual businesses and the name of the shopping center. �-t�-�ea�i�a�� of the sign face shali be used for the shopping center n ,��>,� �. -�7 �.: ��-�� name. � 6. The design of the sign to be instalted at the intersection of Long Lake Road and � Highway l4 shail be caordinaied with the design of the bridge. This variance E�- ('"k �� '�� allows for 145 square feet of sign area to be used for wording, of wiuch /2 � ust be used for the name of the shopping center as part oi a wall which would be built east of the bridge. The City sha�l determine the heighi and length of the wall and its piacement, in consultation with the applicant, as long as the sign area allowed by this variance is accommodated. Iithe applicant desires to display signage on the wali, the applicant shall be responsible for the cost of canstructing up to 280 square feet of wall at this lacation, unless an alternative funding arrangement with the City is approved by the City Councii. Adopied this 20th day ofNovember, 1996. Jerry Peterson, Chairman ATTEST: Pamela Sheidon Commur�ity Development Director (SE�,) c:lwpdocsldevcases1462-96pc.res \i Item 4�7 . �; ; : �, ;. � : �; , :�: ' . :. �; .,. 1Vieeting Date: �tafi' �Ze�oa� b�: Plannang Cas� Fiie Nome lZ�questo 1�Tovember 20, 1996 James E�csor�, Planning Associate 46b-96 The applicant is requesting a minor subdivision to move 12.5 feet from 7532 Silver Lake Road to 7540 Silver Lake Road. P�titioraer°: Larry Beach, on behalf of Richard Edin (7532 Silver Lake Road) and Wi�liam Culbert (7540 Silver Lake Road). I.docatian: I''' 1� '` r . �ora'sng/I.,and Use: Appiicabte Regulaiioa�s: 7532 and 7540 Silver Lake Road 7532 �ilver Lake Road: Pending 7540 Silver La�Ce Road: 07-30-23-21-0069 The properties are currentiy zoned R-�., 5ingle and Two-Famiiy Residential and are improved �vith two twin-homes. .Total acreage of existing property is 46,935 square feet {1.08 acres.) �eciion 1201.03, Subd. 1 l, defines a minar subdivision as "A subdivision of a parcel or parcels or property less than iwo acres in size in which no more than one additional parcel or {of is created, Section I202.01, Subd. 1, states "Minor subdivisian requests shall require at ieast a surveyor's certificate for approval." Section 1104.02, Subd. 2, requires a minimum lot width for R-2 lots of 100 feet. Section 1104.Q2, Subd. 3, requires a minirrium lot size of 12,500 square feet for R-2 lots. Section 1204.02, Subd. 6, requires an additional park dedication fee for re-subdivided parcels. This applies only when park dedication fees have not already been paid for the property or if the gross density per acre increases as a resuli oi the remsubdivision. Park dedication fees have been paid for the property to the north, but no fees have been coliected for the subdivision to the south. Attachnaer�ts: Planning Application Zoning Map Certificate oi Survey (recfuction) Descriptians of Easements PL��NTrING CASE NO. 466-96 November 14, 1996 Page 2 �acl�grou�d: This minog subdivision does not creat� an additional lat but instead takes a 12 �/Z fooi wide strip of land from one tot and adds it to the adjoining lot to the north. This action would formalize a previous agreement made with the property owner to the north and Mr. Beach. The property owner to the souih was informed of this impending action prior to the purchase of 7532 Silver Lake Road. Because drainage and utility easements have already been recorded for the existing configuration of the two lots, they will need to be amended in such a wa.y that vacates the old side loi easement between the two properties and creates a new ten (10) foot wide easement centered an the revised side lot property lines. Documents describing the vacated and nerv easements sha11 be provided by the applicani and verified by the City Attorney and staff prior to your meeting on December 4. Analysiso The minimum square foo#age for lot area required by the Code is 12,500 feet. The properties currently well exceed that requirement with 20,853 square feet for the property to the north and 2b,075 square feet for the property to ihe south. After #�e re-subd►vision, the properiies will remain in compliance with this requirement with 23,460 squar� feet for the property to the north and 23,468 square feet for the property to the south. Currently, #he properties meet or exceed the minimum tot width requiremeni (100 feet for the northerly property and 125 feet for the southerly property.) After the re-subdivision, fihe width of the properties will be 112.5 feef for both. The applicant has provided a revised Certificate of Survey for the properties located at 7540 and 7532 Silver Lake Road. This revised Certificate of Survey shows the property lines and easements as revised with the former property lines and easements in the background. The revised lots have been Iabeled as Parcel X(7540 Sitver Lake Road) and Parcel Y(7532 Siiver Lake Road.) The Certificate of Suzvey includes the revised legai descriptions for both parceis, �.s welt as their former descriptions. ltecammes�datior�< Staff is favorable toward the approvai of this minor subdivision if the following requirements are met; The applicant shail submit the signed, revised easements prior to the City CounciI's action on this item. The easements are expected for your meeting on December 4. 2, The applicant shall provide the City with a park dedication fee in the amount of $100 per Code requirements in Section 1204,02. The appiicant sha11 provide the City with notarized letters of permission from William Culpert and Richard Edin, owners of 7532 and 7540 Siiver Lake Road, respectively. + A � AG��,ES� , <�, ," ! � : v .„ � -� I� � �. � ••� �, �•.. �� v � `� a � woo � � �, �ire�t p,�dres, Ci�}/, St�t�, and �°ip Cade � ��iQCie L �o '° ��'° lni�res� i� Pra�oerty (c:��cfe apprapriate baxj: � Owr�er ot Property ❑ C�ntracd iar Deed Cwrssr �,] Lessae, Operaior, Manager ❑ Agresm�rrt ta Pur�.�tase Q ori�er (expla;nj . Dacumerresry evid�nr� at a{splicgrre's im�csst in �e prcc�rty may .".e r�qwrad beror� 5nal C:�+ ��orr of �Sis r�u�t pqo��iY 1N`/�L�/��J: A��ress/Cener� L�c�iicr�_ '� �� Z~"�� .��uer ��:1!� l2�4 1 L�c�a1 De��,�pt�an ar Prc�er�y i�entincatrcn ,Vur��er L�g�i C�rn�r: Na��/Ad�r�� i�. � � v�r � �Ce. S'7� b.� r� I J e i 1�..�� P�esent Use (c,tiec:c anpr�r�riate �cx): [a' UndevefQ�ed/Vaeant ❑ Single �-3rnily Dweiling � DupEewTwa ramily Dweiling �,1 Mu1ti-r°amriy {No, of L�nres } C� Business/Cqrrirnerciai `s°;a�lisnment � Indus'�ia! �stahiist�ment � Other (�xnlain) • Prooeriy C�ssmc.�tiae�; [ ,4bs#r�ct � i arrens �E��UE�T:� i� i _ �' � ____�rnw� � �v ��: c� c� ►� e , a�� -�o -- ti 5�(-D �5� 1ue��.C�u� �� — eO1ease noYe: A�o�icarR ,�rsay �e rescans�cie icr acczianal •'�s assoc:at� �nri��e review ci .t�is recuest 1 i-a��Y D��:,�E T'r{AT i fF� ��cVE Si;�, �°°.�r1�,V i�nC � nUE �eacninq Venane� C.zssaiacrrai Usa Permi4 C.�da ,#e c eal ❑�veioo.�Siia r!an r�aviere , inar Subaivision � rrisa�n r•%m�. ��an .�rrteridma�vt 'Netleno .�,lterariar9 P°rmrt 'Ne�fana �uriec r'ssrn�t r'ann�ng a'iqrs r"JO r�JQ .'vnendmerrt S�C�/acra. ,rini�um S%CQ. ,�r�amuny 57.�70 r'1-t � r�-2 - S: r. sel otPter� S�C� ii-t � n-2 • S:°a. �I cthers ��JO Si5 ai Qolac; e. ;iinimurrt ; QQ. ;tts5dmuivy y'-� St57 S�°ti pius SZ_°0 deac�it S<.CQ �0 aicas caccsa ca�rminac rv St�f S�0 � 3:Q �� $t � `-� Sir�na�r� P��m��a ?�rfc °c:r� Oedic.�ion ree Da� r�� cs�eaios Num�r TrJt�i re� Paa� abd Oa� ?� P.ocaioc Numaer �aditiana3 rs� '�ad C are �:�d ,=+ec�+ot �lumcmr / �O- a o /�-i • //: ��3 �i- � Cac� ar �r1a! a�°°,:��n AP!��CVE� I� OEVIE� � iniy�; : �ar,� l � � � `% - °I P?�nnrng G� �. ��?l� ° �t,i� � �,anr ie�. �1c:..:urre 1la. � 6 � � �� G. �� . �"� 7�9% 7�Q 7835 7840 7887 7820 7825 7880 7879 78i � 7815 7570 7865 Sfl 880 78b1 o° o � n 7850 � 78d1 4 '# � •'i:�'r};':�.{�::�'`�-:. 783 782i � N m /b� .a.r.i /`!JH � rrvy /`JJ4 /999 � � N � n m 7934 7433 7950 79� 7945 7946 74i I � `�i �0 7932 793Ci 7935 7930 791 8 A Ol Y1 � OI �`1 � 9d O jQ N N N i4OU %9Oi iQOO N N N %4OO 79O 7 7s� N HiLLV1EW ev ♦ m . . . � :``i 88 7981 N _ R,^� o� cnv 788 p 7891 N N i 7L �7 0 � �asa �a3s i �� e's z 7��.s �se� 7s� cv o �eso �aat m � �� 78�a � �err �esa �ss� a°� m � 7B01 ,y� `Y ,� 70b3 784 764' cv w ea 80 779i ,, ,�?�a 7657 7830Q m na 3 fi—� ti �� -�o. � �a2 �° �si 'riat 7760 1.� a `� , 8rT 7a, rn fi T769 778 `Y1ry ^•�, ��,� y'1� e3r 7800 � 780f sa r�s9 7�7� ti � R—� 7eo- � - �a rr4s r�sa ris7 �' ti� �1 77s: � � - _ - �-rss n3 na n2s — e 6 - -- a ti " 7755 776' •�"�""'�� '_ 772 3 772 772 T723 _ � 7801 ... • �.:: •�iir'ri .....:..::..: ........:: _:i�ti � 775: �• =>:i:;��: ' :..;• . � ^ �3 �s� _" :.�;:�:•._" .:�:�::'��.�.>��;•` 77't � 77t rri Tr�s �tiy r�a: °' z m n� ti :c�::::;�>..;:�;�:_::�::::_:-;:;•:.: N niox n� ! :.::-.::::-� .. . .............. ._............. rii: .::�:::�::-:•,� .:.............................. nio �ii N na _ �:�R�::"' � ........................ - = m 7692 R •-.�;�y � 7685 7685 � ,ma, n 769 76� �7690 �(j� - p N 7680 � 7669 7670 7&63 � 768 �P �O m Q %6% %s$ � Q O O o %9�� %6�5 %88Q � n n n 768 � 7653 7655 7666 7g�� 76d4 �� 7633 7664 7�29 7fi34 )635 762 7629 7520 7625 76�0 787 7627' 7600 76i9 7�0 780i 7� 7583 7594 758 �583 75 7575 ' 7579 75B8 � 759 7565 O 7565 ( 7�9 0 75 7546 7S'SS 755 � 7555 �7" �—� �1 7572 -a W 55S 7552 > 7545 755 pz 7545 7560 � 7554 � 7538 W 754 X 7�i5 �� n p � P � � ^ "T +� sooi r� 75� n N 7500 N �v N cm�a g 2 20NSdN N � � DRNE 7522 �� 0�7474 7489 q � 7490 7485 m A %4s5 O O 7474 7b71 747 4g� P � cmv 7a52 454 BROPISOh! 7aa8 7445 — 7452 7t31 7456 � � 74�t4 N (d 7430 743�. 743d j 7415 744Z � p 7i09 7440 � 740 74D5 � 7472 7408 z 7aa5 7380 � 738i 7382 7395 740� � 7350 N 7355 73$Q 7�5 73g0 i347 ] 7350 7373 � �2 327 � ,� 73+4 325 � m N ^ O C 33 N9 N ^ O O 3I i N N h� i�3$ '°�� "�'� � c�°�i N c�i c°'i c°ri 315 m m �� ,.m,, 73 7 4 I fV I � I I O I a� � c0 NT I i0 �9 � M N Q O I C o o a o� rn m N a� rn m m N � � _ � _ N � N . �� . ,. - . ,� �- . � /_ '� � " � � I. 1 � " ..� /. , � • ' � �• � I. �. 1,. '� � � .I: .� � � � ..- � � t- n ... �� N . N N S��V�� i PAR K �� } + a- 42 a h� r. n ��yp OR � o ° 74i v v n n � n n �e in Y i� ii h ^ C N N N � i qG {� t0 N +� r� n 35 � �` _ n n � 731 �� E�. n N! N � 5278 527 �� ti � ' ^ i� iv n-°-N � o,o cv n N d N tA p� w °f° rn � m � N w � r� eON rf�a h..en m�a„[�p N H fV t`t � ^ �eN �° N 7 P O N /� 1� N a.. ) O n` N N N N ) m + a .c .°- � ;a <°. cmv ' "d e�e � � � 1G O� fD N N � N n 'N m 0� � C(C ��.s ry � N N ..... m O1 �o A N � eo � i n N m m N PNO�� m <o �n �nu� ��D�9 W N 1 i NDU-14-1996 18�23 FROM E.�. RUD & SONS For: LAk'RY ��'�4C}� s�5� x�au�od �P Mourrds i�//e�, Aq/d �5112 ' ! T�'�� 7�4-�5608 T� 7843� � � j- �' ----- -- --='-- � ; , . -r---- � f t r, ; ; ___ ;•, • ,�� ;� ;a�sk; �,i '-�;.J � � I I y p I '° � � ` q � b � .. i r � °��; �N�r�r 1 �0�, f 3 � Towrtho�a� j Gar. � � f � � � � � � � � � � ,� � Gar. � `---s«,tti ir�� ar tr,� ; � � `° 75�� `` st1 , Id 59 ft. of Lot .3 � ` a_______r q ° e °---1 � � � � ° � ca ; � ,, � N � Sou4h iine of Lat 3, ��'; i; P3.032 .�q. f$. "f � f° o OAILE� KNQ{1S - �____�------- ------- � ��°AfL � p � 1 ��ments to be vaeafad ` a� i � � r� � � ,,_.— 'Ch lirte af Lot 1) - "` ;n °'" r ° '� — °° "'° n � ino of Lot 10 � a r �? � r � ,.,,�Q�,$, ,w � �? �, =°_ : I PARK KNALLS � i REYISED bIVI5�0�t UNE -° � j'�� •-South I'�n� ot_4ha_AI 92T� tt��of�lata 40 a�d';ii-� _� � � �o _ � t t! n � � � � � %.?�� dadc f P ! l N i v � I � , . � . .� ; `____., ,' �! D W � ,, � � � �___----, j � w � ,c �t4i ° `° ' � �, � � � � � + I ! ._ o � � ��+.' � 16,646 aq. f!. i i Car, i ��`; � ' � 208:6 � Tmwnf�aus�, � .• � ' : � ; � Gor. ; � , ' � i�.30 � ` � f � � _�e..l Loa e e J C_ I i a 38 I , i dmtic' �,i i�: I � i i� _ S C � � � � �_ �a��l° � ��°� °�'..m.. � � , 1 �� _� ve e .. . �� J � _____ "' � DE7'.4IL No Sco1� �'g �� Q �zos.ss �'° � �� ri � � s � • Aa� tnot porr or Lar � e� �, �ArtEr Kn�c.� Ro��y c�wnry �r�er�r� ij�arg .sa✓M o9 tho nae-Ph .�0 fieot th � Sub�ct Po �clnag� wid ut�ty �nts ov� ih� s�8 30 fs�f w�d drm aartA ,� i�f Ph�l 1he naih %'� fevf ot GoPa 10 �O iJ, bs4�'� �!#�K �LSo l��y Ar.+t�#X . �vn�a?a S?rB�ct to �vina� a� uP�71Ay �tta asw th+ rt�0i .S � eosf V... 10 �! wvd earoat ,� +�f tH�o� � r�x x�a r�or �n o� cat .� g✓�� r, a�r xaoct� �om�y� c�ry, ��ot�. �a�,� sor�th a1 Phe raor'Ph � lvei fh�f, tofl�th� t�/9h th� f�°th Y�.S f�t o0 Lo?a 1� �7d f1e �R/�e° LAX� PAR�C �LLSy' R��y L'odJP7fj/� �Ab7le6t�OBa, PA�C'_Ft Y� T� �dflk 62�3 �et o! th� rro�84 7� li�t of LeP,� 1� � Y$ SPRAV� 1�E �Ml� Rt�sey Coun� �Jnn�oias r:s� 7J/`T�/Q6_(�asemc�t�s updGtgd� '�~�le� : J. � 3Q'r: . Dra�n B. Book Ga � pi�• ,�ob M�. :; �by ccm lfly `��P fh/� p/�r, �rmay �* r�tarP �as prep�ed �y r�ra or und�, rrty � •�� 4t evp�rw€i�x ��irot / os�s a duly R�,Es��r�d L�c� .S�n��' un��r Ph� lor�� `rw 5'2� .��rire�ta. AaPe� thl.� ! ��cy oP,_,�P.9�. m,��l�l?�Y�1 �v� F�.. _ ro �. . _�_'�i, �2 P.02 N�V-1�-1996 16�18 FR�M E.G. RUD & 50NS TO 7843462 P.�2 a o a j i �ovember �2, 1996 LaPa� suRVrEroas '.�.180 L�I�G`�Oi�3 AVE. N.�. CdRCLE PIN�S ('L�I�iGiOf+J)o tull[�N�SO"i"A�5.094 ' (612). y��-5�� _� {6 i �} 7��=6�07 � Pr.o osed Des�i,��ions For Easei�t�fs to be Vacaied T�e sout�Z 5 feet of I,ot 3, Blocis i, Daii�y i�riollsy Ramsey County, �ilinnesoi� except il�e r�r�st 3� fe�i th�'eo£ Th� aorth 5 feet o�I�ei 1 i' ��JdiY� LQdl� P668A 1V1V��y �� OWid�, �r�es�ta; ex��pi tli� west-3� f�ei thereof and the north � 2, 5 f� Qi th� east � feet of th� �rest 3� feet of said Lot 11. The north 5 f�ei af I.ot 10 a�d ilie south 7.5 �eet af the norih 12. 5 feei of ihe east 10� f��C of said Lat I�,.all in �gring �.ak� �ark IZn�lls, ey Cou��y, l�linnesota. . Pro osed E�seraeat 1�escri tions for Par�el X arlii Parcel Y _ i � . i Parcel X: - " . � � . i'F�e south 5 feet o%the �norih IZ.S feet of Lot 11 �except the a�e�t 30 fee� iher�f and the sauth 5 fe�t �" of the north i 2. 5 feet of L�t 10' Q,ld IYI �p�g L�� P�.T� d�dlQlie�y �arnsey Cou�ty, IVT�inesata. Farccl Y� � The sau�h 5 feet of the north 17.5 feet of Lot 1 l, e�cept ti�e west 38 feet thereof and tiie s�uth � feet of the norih 17.5 feei of Lot 10, al1 in �pring Lake Park Knolls, �amsey Courrty, �1`inrxesota. II � Fo�• LARRY BEACH 6951 Knollurood Or. Mounds 1/iew MN 55112 Te/e: 780-56D8 J 0 c N � � �� - � � - - , �----r----------------� , �, _ � .�, i � ` � �� deck � � ' f ' � � ao � � �----� F-------, 7542 � � � I ' r � � ; ' I car. � � Townhouse � � � 208.i9 � ! ? �°Sovth line of the � 0 30 �`' N50ft.ofLot3 , c p � I j----i y N � Saulh line of Lot 3, I�°ck� b 6 OAILE� K4GL�S - '- �----`-- w._._ �-,-.r...,,.�,.,�=>,Q._ ..�._T�,.�.. ; Gar. ; - ' i `� 7540 L Y___'_"J �� L i j %.4,�.�.2 Sq. ft. line of Lot 71 - ='"'�L — .__ __ _. m P � � �+. — — � � �� -_' . .� ��,.��,w zos.e ^ � _ � ��--��_� � � /` REVISED DIVlSION LINE--' N? i � � ti�-Soutfi line of_the IS 12.5 ft_ of� Lots 10 and j 1 �� I l l; �, I � 3a � 7532 ; de`k; ;'' ° � � � i F"------� i � �,/ ' �f�� i J i i � c ' � � i i � a �a � .' ` � >5.646 sq. ft, i Gor. , f , [a � I � I i � 38 � _ I ,2D8.6 � : � ; � � � � � 7530 � �' __ i � ; de�k ; L__ �.=-_�- N_ _� ,S :�• i . �Y I � � N N � I 'A �N 4 0 o tu I 30 e-,` Q � � � Towrthouse� � I � Gar. ; � I ; ` r-------� � f ^- I ` I �� i � � � ': � ,, - .--------------� __ � � to � —�-- — —=__.J ��1-1 �: e �! ;� < O O 0 b � DETAIL � 1 � i � of Lot 10 <E PARK KNOLLS � � ---8 VD DETAIL No Scale /�° � N o� \ � 208.53 � � � �\ �n // \ r l 75�Q.• A/1 thaP po�t of LoP .7 B/oak f, DA/LEY KNOLLS, Ramsey Counfy, Minnesota, lying soufh of fha na�h 50 faet thereo(. Subject to drainage and utility eosaments o�r the wesf JO feet and the sauth 5 feet ther�eof 75.i2.• The north 75 feet af Lots 10 and ll, SPR/NG LAK£ PARK f(NOLLS, Ramsey County, Mrnnesoto. Su6lact to d�ainage ond utiJity aosements ovar the norfh 5 Peef, eost 10 fect ond west .38 feet thereol. RE�//SED PROPE/7TY D£SCRlP_71Q6� p�• A// that part o/ Lot J Block l, DAILEY KNOLLS, Romsey County, Alinnesoto. /yrng south af the north 50 faet thereof, together with the north 12.5 feet of Lats 10 ond 11, SPR/NC LAKE PARK KNOLLS, Ramsey County, Minnesoto. PrtRCEL Y.• The souPh 62.5 fsef of the north 75 fest of Lois l0 and lf, SPRINC LRKE PARK K/VOLLS Ramsey County, Minnesoto. � s; f ;: ;- ,: Revised 11/14/96 (easemenfs updated) , Sco/e: 1'= 30' Oravin B. �KB Book Po e Disk: -- Job No. 955.39CS2 ' l he�eby certify thot this p/on, su�vey o� report was prepored by me o� unae� my ��'�� ' ��" '' di�ect supervisron and thof l am o duly Registe�ed Land Surveyo� under the laws =°'�� o�� of the St A' ne ta. Dofed this /4''�doy of Nv I9 9G. g�� T�N �Ve�. ivo. GIR�� PIN�S,i11NN�80YA 68�Idm3Ba28� License No. 98�� iEL, i�-86gm I�� i8�-6�m, ' I ; Item ��8 :� �: : � �> � ;; , � � ? _ �: !; ,. I�Ieetir�g Date: Siafi ateport b�o �tann�ng Case �'eie 1�10. e November 20, 1996 PameIa Sheldon, Community Developmen� I3irector ,.: •. Itequest: The applicant is requesting a variance in the Si�n Code to allow the installation of a manument-style directional sign at one driveway entrance on Highway IO and one on County Road H2. P�tiiioreere Locatio"o ,' ,1�! � r �o�aing/I.anci jJse: Applicabl� Itegc�tations: Attachiteents: �ackgro�nd: �aiurn Deveiopment 2375-2395 I�ighway 10 08-3 0-23 -31-0001,2, 3 B�3 The property at 23�5 Highway 10 is being used for the existing Satum dea,lership, and at 2395 Highway 10 for an existing Citgo gasoline station. The regulations applicable to this request are stated and discussed under the analysis section of this report. Diagram of sign The Saturn dealership intends to purchase the Citgo gasoline station, and use this property for an expansion. At your meeting on November b, the Planning Commission considered and recommended in favor af a conditional use permit which would allow for this expansion. The Saturn propasal included the addition of two monument signs, measuring 5%et high by 8 foot 6.5 inches wide (42.7 sq.ft.}, which would be located at the westernmost driveway on Highway 10 and the easternmost driveway on County Road H2. The signs would assist in directing customer traffic. The existing signage zncludes the foltowing: � existir�g pylon sign 10' x 10' on 26' high supports; area = 140 sq.ft. � existing wall sign 23" x 26.5 ; area = 50.� sq.ft. � used car sign, ground mounted 8' b�1/2" x 5' = 42.7 sq.ft. a miscelianeous smali dire�tional signs The total signage on the siie is 193.5 square feet. Afl af the signage has approved perrnits. The B-3 district allows for 100 square feet per business occupant, and one general Planning Commission Planning Case No. 468-96: Saturn Development . \? November 20, 1996 Page 2 pedestal sign not exceeding 340 squar� feet, for a total sign area of 440 square feet. If the two additional manument signs were added to the existing signage on the site, the total signage on ihe site would be 278.9 square feet, which is well within the total square footage atlowed. The way the signage is proposed to be distributed and the types of signs proposed, however, are not anticipated by the Sign Code. In eil'ect, signage would be redistributed from the pylon sign to two monument signs. Staf�feels thaY this approach is acceptable and makes the signage package more functianai, but it does require approvat of a variance. 7Chis item is being scheduled on your November 20 meeting for discussion, and has been noticed for action on December 4. The criteria for approval of variances to �he Sign Code are stated below wiih comments from staff as to how this proposal meets the criteria. a. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to the property which do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinzty and result from iot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over which the owners or the property since the effective date hereof had no control. c, That the special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant, The Saturn dealership has 764 feet of frontage along Highway 1Q and 580 feet of frontage along County Road H2, and two driveways on each frontage. This amount of frontage is longer than most praperties aiong the commercial corridor on Highway i 0. The City's Sign Code limits properties in the B-3 district to two types of signage: one 340 st�uare foot pylon sign and business accupant signage not to exceed 100 square feet. The Sign Code does nat anticipaie the provision of directiona( signage on properties in the B-3 district. I�ue to the long frontages and the types of activities on this site, directional sibnage is needed to insure customer safety and smooth trai�c flow. The appIicant's proposal does not increase the tota( square foo�age of signage above the amount allowed by the Sign Code, but redistributes sign area from what would have been displayed on the pylon sign to two monument-style directional signs. b. The Iiteral interpretation of khe pravisions of this Title would deprive the app[icant o£ rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this Title. i'hat granting the vaciance requested wiii not confer on ttae applicant any special privilege that is denied by ihis Titie to o�vners of other lands, structures or builciings in the same districE. g. Circumstances under which the titeral interpretation of the provisions of this Title create an undue hardship on the applic�nt. Economic hardship may be a circwnstance for issuance of a variance. Pianning Commission ' Planning Case No. 4b8-96: Saturn Development November 20, 1996 Page 3 The amount of signage allowed on this site will not be increased by the graniing of this variance. The to�al sign area on the site witl be 279 square feet, where 440 square feei a��e allowed. Redistribution of sign area from what would be allowed for a pylon sign to monument-style directional signs will reduce �he visual impact of signage on the site. The applicant will be unable io provide adequate direc�ional signage to customers without approval of this variance. Such signage is needed to improve safety and smooth traffic #�ow. e. That the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviat� the hardship. f. The variance requested would not be materially detrimental to khe purpose af this Title or to other property in the same zone. The amount of signage requested, when added to the existing signage on the site, is 161 square feet less than the sign area permitted to the site. The size of the directionat signs ir� modest in comparison to the scale of the sit� and the Iength of the frontages. The use of directionai signa�e, as opposed to a larger pyion sign, will make the signage on the sifie more functional. St�ff Reeora�rnendaiioi'e Favorable to granting fihe variance based on the fact that the iotal amouni of signage on the site is less than altowed by the Code, and fhe size of and activities on the site require addifiionaI directional signage for customers to insure safety and smooth traffic flow. • cc: J'im Price, Saturn Development, P.O. Box I0813, White Bear Lake, MN 55I 10; FAX '790-9416 Darwin Lindahi, Darwin Lzndahl Architects, P.A. 5701 Shingle Creek Parkway, Suite #130, Minneapolis, MN 55430; FAX 560-0441 Francis J. CoyIe, Mr., Coyle, Gilman & Stengel, 305 First of America Bank Building, 100 Seventeenth Street, Rock Istand, II., 61201; FAX i88-0480 c:lwpdocs\devcases14b8-961468-96, sr .. - ` \ , \ � , - .� a � --�_ 8'-6 I/a" � � � � i O! �� i k � � � �'i�s�ii�M��!! � I ��i uo-r.-o �c�,LF , ��-� '. � ' /� �`` � Toe Ivlounds View Planning Commission F�°om: Pamela Sheldon, Communaty Development Director S�ebjec�: Proposed Schedule for Planning Commissio�r Meetings in 1997 I9ateo November 20, 1995 As we approach the end of the year, we need to set the schedule for Planning Commission meetings in 1997. I have aftached a caler�dar wiih suggested dates circled for your review. The meetings in January and July are on the second and fourth Wednesdays because of the New Year's Day and Fourth of July holidays. We would also like to discuss with Planning Comrnission the current practice af having ev�ry case go ta an agenda meeting and then an action meeting, and havin� the agenda and action meetings separate. The present time line for bringing cases to Planning Cammission is as follows: Deadline for submittal: Agenda meeting Action meeting Friday three weeks prior to agenda meeting (usually iast Friday oimonth) Tl�rd Wednesday of month First Wednesday of foliowing month Most of the cases handled by Planrung Commission must also be forwarded to City Council �or finat action. If an applicant submits on the deadline, it is 33 days from when a recommendation will be made by Pianning Commission and 52 days from when City Council takes action. If tne applicant submits somewhere in between deadlines, we a.re usualiy up against the 60 day rule. If an applicant rrusses the deadline for submittal, they must wait up to one month before ihey can submit again to get on the Planning Commission agenda for discussion. Many applicants are not aware of the lead time necessary to submit, and so miss the deadlines. Staff would like to propose that the Planning Commission agendas be divided into discussion and action items so that the longesi delay, if an appiicant misses a submittal deadline, is approximately two weeks. VVe would also like �o suggest that certain items such as conditional use permits £or oversized gara�es and for temporary outdoor sales, Iot sptits, sirr�pler variances be discussed and decided in the same n�eeting, if passibie. If Planning Commission felf that the case was not ready for decision, then it co�ald be continued to the next zneeting two weeks later. We felt that this was an appropriate time to bring up these issues, since we need to set the meeting schedule far next year. � _ _.. � � � � � � � � !.. �` ,,. �\. .'. --- ---- -- ` ...... .. ..... ... .. .... . . v, � ev a ,o cv �,yy � � a� u7 e� � � � � � � N �� 0 ¢� � � � tV N � � V w- W N N � ,cy `°� � � �yj .-- � �f3 N d ^ N CV U' ^ � N tV _ � � � CV N Q � � `�Q� �� C�� r,a� �, Ae n � N O� �^� ^ � � � � � N � � � N CV C � � � �N N , � � d�� Q�m� � � O h Q �N, � ��Nj N � � � � cv � � � � � � N r? � � tV 9- '� � O � 3 �Q��N Q� ,�Q�� -�,�► � ,a"'o� e%1 �y �N P v] r. � en c� o. 'o r� � �� ts. ��NO� � c� c� "` �°` ^ � c�t ee�v � �� .O"'�� N Q p� � CV P �O CV � � � w �t? N N � a r� �, � � cn tf7 N O� �O N � � ^ � � ti, �ay p P° � '.° ^ Nc� � � � �O°°�o � � � p��N� � ��cvc�v v7 ,p � O � � ^ � � N t� �p �? d ^ N CY �. �NP�O N � � �j Q "°oN i ~ � � r N � N �° � � Q � �m�NCV [n e''9 (� � � '� � � LL. NP'o�0� I � � � � N N � � � O��N � .�� evo�N vi � ^ � u? � �y � � � � � �cvcv t� u� � P ,O �� u� uJ *— � ,� a N m w� � ^ � •— U � N try Q� Np�'�N � � � � � N N � � � N N C%j .-q � t[7 N U � N C�I � ^ � N N C W t� ,� �"i � � m �� N�� O� ��N � �c]r� v r-. � cn Cy p `O �� 4 � N � � ^ � � � N• � � Q � � � �,— NP�N � � O � ^ °��N N U o� � � `�' � C V C�I � ,o � o '� CV CV . � � N � � N en .o � O n —cvt� � �NO��O fV �� . a �►� ��.�No � .s��c�� N CV rn h�^� � cv cv } � },, � ' � � � � �� f �' � i # �"� �,� �,�-�= A WoYkirig Coriference of llae Coanrrtu�tity Cortiteciions Pt'ojecP � ' � DESI�It CQ1El�8Y f�rAlli�F'(CClit IJi'l)lii2 I.Ll6dC�SCll17i ' � � - _ _' ,, , ._ ' � � f . Decep�tber� Il - 12, 1996 . � , Earle B� own Co�ztinc�ing Educr�tiori Cerzter , t � _ _ Urtivef-siry of MinrZesota,� St. Paul ,�;_ -� _, . , .. - , , _ .. , , . - `' , . � ` ` `` , ` ;' t ` -- � = ,� - , .. - ' f , , . � �, - ,. 1 , ,� , Ut3NERS3TY OF MtNNESOTA �1�� '+ ��[j�� Ilesigrt Cenler for Anrericart ' ` ; : � ; Urban Lundscape First-ring snburban communi[ies have long been mainstays of stability. Home to ; . thousands of post-war families, these communities offered the proinise of an attrac, �; � The Desig�z Ce��terforAtnerrcari Ur- � tive, secure, and comforiable lifestyle: a rural setting, new homes �in low-density � Fian I.andscape ds a research �r►:it '�residentiaf developments, a�eessible clusters of goods and services, high-quaiity �: withirr the College of Architectiu-e � schools. They were the wave of tl�e fueare, the narm to which many aspired. �' ` and Landscape Architectur•e a� lffe ��ri ears after the ftrst rin s initial sur e af rowlh howev�er the realit is s!i htl Universit�� of Mi�uiesota. 11 was es- Y y g� g '� ' � y g� difCerent. These are communities in transition, and iransition has brought witl� it a __ tablished �vifh a gr•ariP fr"ont the Day- set of complex and dynamic challenges: ' , to�a Hudsat 'Fouitdatiori,' support _ ' fromfederal, state and local govern- ` ° renovating and revitalizing an agirig housing stock; ,; �: ; � rnent agencies, a�7d grants fron4 tton- °�'orking with outdated land-use �nd transpottatiori polici�s; s o addressing escalaYing human develapmen[ needs; and '. { profit orgaiiizations. Its »aission is . , , - , id educate puGlic and private deci-' � • recognizing environmentat concerns and neglected naiural resoarces. � � sion �irakers, professionals a�zd citi- _. These chaltenges have not only. gi'ven nse to a sens�e of urgency, but created the i , ze�as about the "vatue of desig» as a opportuni[y ta assess the todls the first ri�g wiil need as it moves into the next � strategic parttzerwith ecoitor�iic mtd =_� century — Eo determine what it wil(_iake t� niaintain'`�ivable comm�nities."� � �, , � lic�ma�i intet•ests in the makij�g of This iask will fall to the full spectruin of community �eade�ship within the first ring. , comntttnity-based development '�e De�ign Center's "Forum on the First E2ing" �is intended ta being toge[her elected ' . str•ategies,and sustai�table urbart� officials, city staff, and other civic leaders from more,than thirty firs[-ring commu- . . lnndscapes. _ , nities to discttss wh�t strateg�es of promise a.�'e in place and what strategies we wiil need to create to move the region forward. �, ' Tlte Co+?a»unrty Co�inectioras Project , j a�fd this corifer�ence are funded - � � �tl2rouglt a gr�a�tt from the McKiiight �1r.at We Hope fo Accomplish � ' Foulidatio�t. � 'I'he forum is intended to accomplish four things: - i 1. Settirlg tlte Stage—exploring the pubiic policy and physica[ planning con�exl 1 ` � � within which discussions about strategy must occur; 2. Iderrtifj�ing Models — sharing emerging municipal approaches to transit cor- � , ridots, natoeal systems, housing, and human "services that might be replicated; . 3. Evalualirtg I�ttpternentarion. Strategies—examining the obstacles and oppor- � � tunities to move promising 's[rategies forward; and �' '['or fur4Her infortaiatiori, cal[ ti�e 4. Addi�ig !t Up —develbping areas of consensus about what to do next. � I)esign Center: 627-1�50 e�ct. 31� We hope the forum wiil both take stacic and set a course. The Design Center is eager to explare ways 4o suppor[ the efforts of first-ring communities to share infor- ' Pl�oto: Richtield, i954. Minneapnlrs Star & mation, create new development and policy tools, and work in concert for legisla- ' , '1'rtbra,:�, Minnesotn Hisroric�! Society tive and t•egulatory clianges at the state and regional Iev�l. � ` r � 1 . ' i �. . , , ' � The �+lork C�roups: _. ; � � . , � , � � � � r� . _. �� , We iiave divided�the working sessions into two parts., Part A will crystallize so�►e'of the key issues faciug first-ring co3nmu- nitics and define the compo�zent parls of tlzose issues. Part 6 wiEl examiiie intpiementation — wl�at tools are available, where � gaps exisl, and wEiat obstacles tnust be overcome. ��ch Parl will open with a panel presentation of ca�e studies, followed by an audience discussion. The grqups will then break into smali �working sessions to pursuc issues more intensivefy. f • � �, , , ' - ; � , _ Corric��rs Wor�� Gro�� _ � � . • ' � t �' When communities search %r developmenl and redevetop- ment sites and opporfunities, the corridor frequently emerges ,as a'�flexible resource and valuable asset. Typicaily corridors are found along trank highways ar county roads, and tEieir development patterns vary widely in scale, capacity, and iand- use. Ma[ci�ig the transition from a lrunk iyighway to a roulli- purpose community'corridor, Howevee, requires creative thinking, flexible tools and policies, ai�d seasoned negotia- � tion s�ills. The discussion will focus on issues surrounding: � , . �; ` ;�� mixed-use �edevelopment ot3 eransporta[ion eon-idors; `� � integration of frar�sit into smai! scafe developme�tl; . l and , �, diverse approaches to neigl�borhood r�odes. . ' , � Some of the anticipated policy yuestions are: , a What is the best balance between community needs and regional/fecleral systems and standards? � What is the ciry's role in creating a sense of commu- nity and connection along the corridor?. m, How might cities re[hink policies and worEting ` , strategies to encourage mixed-use developmertt? + { ` � • - . I3ousi�ag and I�ieighborhoods �oi�k Gxoup . The wave oC new housing development in ou[er-ring sub- ' urbs has set a meEro standard for measuring the growth and ' stabitity of cities. Yet, first-ring suburbs do not have the raw land necessary to meet this narrow deftnition of growth. To , address tl�eir changing and diverse demographics, these com- munities must instead design a unique development model � that takes acivantage of Eheir exisiing stock, creates iinkages , `[o services and amenities; and intehsifies neighborhood iden-, ` � tiEy. Ti�e discussion will focus ori issues surrounding: • aiternative models for renovation of existing housing; • defining wl�at affoi'dable housing means in the first , ' ring; and � �, integrating low-income housi�►g issues into overall ' housing policies. ,• Some of the anticipated policy yuestions are: c_ •� How do individual reliab and renovation projects add up to a package marke[able to die private sector? 0 How does housing policy address neighbornoods as a whole— inciuding heighborhood services and ameni- . ties — not just build u�iiEs? lva�ural Syste�ns �oxf� Group � Natural systems form the'under�ying physical base oi� wl�ich each of our communities sits. But pasl land-use decisions that failed to take environment�! considerations into account liave`t ied io such prablems as decreased water quality and stprmwater capacity, tlje loss of urban forest, or a dearth of urban wilds. The premise for ihis session is that the natural systems of tl�ese communities are pazt aF a uniquely pubiic reaitn — the civic infrastructure — and tY►at cities need to integrate lhese systems inio tlae municipal pl�r4ning process in order ta enhance their long-term econonlic, social; and environtnental health. 'I'he discussion wifl high[ight three ti�emes ihat represent di#�ferent aspects of �n environmental agenda; ' ' ° a focus on environmentai quality; ` � the confli�[ing values of open space; and ' ° nakural systems as public inCtastructure. 5ome of Q�e anticipated policy questions are: � Wliat are distinct environmental issues in the first-ring? a' How effective ar� cun'ent approaclaes? �• What structural changes are needed for natural systems to becorne an integra! part of city and regional planning? , `- � , � ; � , , ,.., ,, / �Ia�man Ser'v�ees � Civ�c Ca�acjty Woe-k G�oup ` , , Sociai needs in the �rst ring have historicafly been addressed through traditional anchoring institutions: schools, churches and civic organizations. As tiiese needs ha've changed, those institutions have been supplemented by an emerging social infrastructure of human development and sociai service pro- viders. Cities have also explored new niodels that involve citi- zens more direc[ly iti responding [o the communiiy's chang- ing socio%conbmic profile. The discussion wiil focus on three elements of the human developnnent landscape: �, , • providing a so'cial safety net in the first ring; a coping with limited resources and cuitivating public / private partnerships; and • creati��g a greater civic capacity by involving citizens in city planning and prioriry-setting. ' f . Some of the anticipaEed policy yuestions are: • What are the roles of the,county, United Way, and cities in providing human services within the first ring? ' � What are possibie funding sources %r the soft costs,of human services7 � � ° How can human deveiopineni and civic capacity be '� integrated into comtnunity development? � ti ,. , , � � �, , r � '� Item ��6 `'i �;, - ; �. . . . ; ..,. , � . :�, - ; .. . :�,. .� , ; ' : :,�. ;,, li'I�egiatg I)�tea Sta�'f �tepoe-� i��o Plann�ng Case �+'iie I�o.: November 20, 199b Pamela �heldon, Community Developmeni Director 467-96 �equeste Warren Schorer, of Land Patterns Landscaping is requesting appraval of a conditional use pemut for outdoor sale of Christmas trees in the parking area by Bridgeman's Restaarant at Mounds View Square, beginning November 29. Pet�t6oner; I.oc�tion: ;" #`, ► �, . Zo►�in�/I.and IJsee Land Paiterns Landscaping 253 S Highway 1 d 07-30-23-11-0079 B-4 Mounds View Square Shopping Center Applicable �te�uEa�ions: The B-4 RegionaI Business District allows for open or outdoor service, sale and rental as an accessory use with approval of a conditional use pernut (Section 11 i5.04. Subd. 2} The criteria which apply are discussed under the Analysis section of this report, and in the attached resolution of approval. Attac�amea�ts: Zoning Map Planning Application Letter of Request Diagram illustrating proposed layout Certificate of Insueance Lease A.greement with Paster Enterprises �ackge°ound: Staf� has received a request on November 12 for outdoor Christmas tree sales in the parking lot adjacent to the Bridgeman's Restaurant. The applicant desires to begin sa.ies on November 29, the day after the Thanksgiving holiday, and was unaware that a conditional use permit is required for such sales. In order to have �he permii before City Council for action prior to November 29, staff is requesting that the Planning Commission discuss and then make iis recommendatian on the permit at your meeting on November 20. We realize that this is not your usual procedure. Staf�felt thai since tlzis request is for temporary sales for a very limited time, is not too compiicated and is tied to the holiday season (which cannoi be rescheduled), it would be appropriate to request the Planning I '' � Plm�ning Commission 467a96: ChrisEtnas Tree Sales at Mounds View Square November 20, 1996 Page 2 Commission to act on November 20. The permit will be heard by City Council on November 25, There is sufficient time to do the notices to surrounding property owners and the newspaper %r this date. With respect to the issue itself, there have been outdoor sales in the parking loi at Mounds View Square in the summertime, On 3une 24, 1995, the City Council granted a conditional use permit to Merryville Farm Market to operate a produce stand from July 15 to September 2, 1996. On February 25, 1996, Linder's Greenhouses was granted a conditional use permit io operate a temporary greenhouse facility from Niarch 20 to July 15, 1996. A similar permit was issued to Linder's Greenhouses in 1995. Staff is not aware of any problems caused by ihese uses. A��lysss/ Recommet�dation: The applicant is proposing ta use a portion of the Bridgeman's Restaurant parking lot for Christmas tree sates (see attached diagram). The area is approximately 8 parking stalls or 1600 square feei. The remainder of this part of the paxking lot has 52 spaces, which staff feels is suflicient to serve the custorr�ers of the tree lot. Bridgeman's Restaurant is vacant '' at this time. The applicant is proposing to have iighting around the perimeter of the iot and one 4 foot x 8 foot sign iocated as is shown on the diagram. He has permission from the property owner for operating the tree lot. He has also provided a certificate of insurance for an aggregate amount of $1,000,000. The B-4 Regional Business District allows for open or outdoor service, sale and rental as an accessory use with approval of a conditional use permit. The criteria for approval are stated in Section 1115.04. Subd. 2 are nated below with comments from sta{� as to how �his proposal meets the cri�eria. a. Outdoor service, sates and equipmeni rental connected with the principat use is Iimited to thirty percent {30%} of the gross floor area of the principal use. The shopping center contains 102,035 square feet of building area. The applicant proposes to occupy 1600 square feet in the pa.rking lot, which is I.6% in comparison to ihe building square %otage on the siie. This criteria is met. Planning Commission 467-96; Christmas Tree Sales at Mounds View Square , Navember 20, 1996 Page 3 b. Ouiside saIes areas are %nced or screened from vi�w of neighboring residential uses or at� abutting residential district in compliance with subdivisions 1103.p8(1) through (5) of this Title. The parking Iot by �ridgeman's Restaurant is does not abut any residential properties, and is bordered on the east by Long Lake Road, south by Highway 10 and north and east by the remainder of fihe 1Vlounds View �quare Shopping �enter. The property directly across Long Lake Road is zoned R-1 but is part of the Sunrise Methodist Church pro}�erty. The are� closest to Bridgeman's is forested and contains a large wetland. The property to the south is zoned B-2 and R-4, and is develaped as Silver View P1aza, a shapping center, and Wildwood Manor, an apartment building for senior citizens. Iviounds View Shopping Center is screened from view from the apartments by a stand of trees between Wildwood Manor and Highway �0. The Bridgeman's site is approximately 450 feet from Wildwood Ivlanor hecause of the intervening highway right-of-way. Staff considers this criteria to be met. c. All lighting shalI be hooded and so directed That the light source shall not be visible from the pubiic right of way or from neighboring residences and shall be in compliance with Section I 103,0 of this Title. T'he applicant is proposing Iighting around the perime�er of the lot, as is noted in his ietter. The typical lighting used in these situations in a string of light bulbs which are not shielded. Staff will atteznpt to get additional in%rmation from the applicant prior to your meeting. If the light strings are low enough (iiotli in heighi and wattage), staff does not anticipate problems with light spillage onto other properties. d. Sales area is grassed or surfaced to control dust. The applicant is proposing to use an existing parking Iot which is suriaced with asphatt. This criteria is met. e. The provisions of subdivision 112�.01(1)e of this Title are considered and satisfactorily met. Adverse Effects: The Plannu�g and Zoning Commission sha11 consider possibie adverse effects of the proposed amendment or conditionai use. Its judgment shall be based upon (but not limited to) the foIIowing factors: (1 } Retationship to Municipal Corr�prehensive P1an. (2) The geographical area invotved. (3) Wliether such use wiii tend to or acivally depreciate the area in which it is proposed. {4) The character of the surrounding area. i i. Ptanning Commission 467-96: Christmas iree Saies at Mounds View Square November 20, 1996 Page 4 (S) The demonstrated need for such use. The proposai is for a Yemporary Ghristmas tree lot in the paricing lot of an e�sting shopping center. Tke shopping center is surrouraded by roadways, and the lot itself is at least 450 feet from the nearest eesidential property. The short duration oithe use will result in it having little if any effect on the surrounding area. The saie of Christmas trees is a typical seasonal business in a community such as Mounds View, and serves a community need. This criteria is met. 5tafi Iteeommenda$ion. Adopt the attached resolution recommending that the City Council approve a conditional use permit for the temporary saie of Christmas trees ai Mounds View Square Shopping Center. �m �o � . 7876 y 7eFi5 - /tloo" ...�. . ._.`_ ..,.,:: � N o - - ��m� z 785.i � ,'� 78�0 y 7877 . 7854 7851 _ 7680 78e5 . 7852 W . 1 _. . 7845 �, ti _ �B 78E3 ` 7H4 7�9 . 7850 7855 7846 � �8� � 7851 � 78.7a Qo -• - 7640 7035 7E40 7829 �-4 '�1 ��o�d r 782 0 78�5 7790 78i5 7800 7917 7750 �L1� y "! ��rr� 781 � � 7805 7780 7801 ti� ,`�`O B0� �01� 8�� 78�0 � 7809 7T70 z 780t 7760 7797 `� ��o ��y R--e, 7aa� w nsz risn � ti�1 na� risa � na� �-rao + 7767 � 7801 ry �si 7750 773t 7730 7'753 n3 ��2 T755 7730 7721 7720 z � nas rno Tr�� r� ti� , ' ti Q %%� Jr N t�o �1 K�j %i8� N iPl ., >� �. ��. , � ,. �a� � 7895 i81 7827 7a: 780 7817 �soa 7soi �aa ni's �4g �s 7ao7 77fi8 7739 7740 7751 �� 7729 77�� 7741 %� nzs rits ria rra� �� nio r�os �q o rrai . ........ O Q W . 'n N 7701 7700 �p Q ............................................... R._2 .. .. ......:� ........................ R_2 a 7842 ...� .. � n r� vi �n P�� e. r v� o Q � � o, r.o f 7694 �[jD � ::. wy q r� r� w�o rn ra �n in vt 2553 ,� u� '° �n tn � �. �O 'n ��'d N N N N h N N N N C`i ZSS S �% 7695 N N � � "�' � �° % � O N 7gg Y "� cv N N ZS49 p 768J 766 � N 7E � / �s�s J R°'� R-4 —3 � ��,3 �6� �-4 isa9 �� 6 3 � 2537 788 St �—� 763 a 7 7555 76Z 7E ti� —� SILVER VIEW e-. 7 7s�s z-_ N � � —2 4 � �, � - N h y � � n � �^,� �—� � " �"1 � n n n � i&3 �� 7F PARK � � � �� N N ul py 0 R02 o�ci N..`° � h1° �-3 a �� o �c ' > a � �i � 7552 � a N r�i � m rn �?�' c�i a' �w � %SSQ (/� h"' I� �1� t0 w t0 .-. �r N N N .. 7542 p�' CV fV N N N � � O O�G %.�.+0 . m � � «N � �' N �, N %532 �n ^ o N � A N P � � N�.N N N N O�N i�.�� N p� o _ ON m � ;szz °"' � n � " � a � �y P� ,,' .� � ° �-°" R—� ' . � � � °� N cirr N ° .,1 i�0 __- _ � °� �� e� '''"N _ �r� �yo, MALL � :• ::: ..: ::..... .... ........�:.:.. ..... ...... ......._ .... . ......_...... ......_ ... ..... _... ....__ ..... ..,... _.... � .:.:: . . . .... - ...... ��:... ..... ;. ......_ ...... .............._ _......_..... , .3N ....._ ..............._......-- ..._......_....._...... , . ., ...._�....._......_......_... .... ._..._....._......'__.... cV' N ... 74 ....._......_ .................... ............ ......._............. _..... I -.. ....___.... _......__.......... .........,...... ..._...._......__....._...... � ' _ ' _ ' — _ -_ O O� ...._. _ .... ............° ...::.. ..... ... _...... __: :c ...... __. .. ..... ......_...... _ ...................»1:::::.: :1:::........_.1:: :-....... ..... ....: %� �� ' _ - ' ' ' ' ' ' '_ � O �L7 ry'i� :d _ ': � O " ' '__ _' __' - _ - _ � _ � O r -- - ' - — j - ' __ - �' � " '_ ry v' 74� _' ' _' " ' _ ^ a� n / t ,}� 7442 7dd r' 4Z r'� n 1 n =_ -':''�,'°�� --- -_ _ ' f/ � �. - - - � _ �� v�E'N �OR � _ PF —° _ _ --- _ _.... ...:: ...... ............... ....... ��' 7408 739 ,� � ° °< �� 333 =- - -_ �. _ ^ P � h 7400 738 � � u, P 7329 = .� 7390 738 N I N i N 732 - rn r �n r, 7378 M OG � � � � 1 N y7 fV N E 7;50 �37 Y n � n I n � 73 = m �� ' ~ %.-S � ! � N N � Q .d 734.a 73& a 735� n�"�. � 7313 _- = n N N n � - � � '��/h� �, � �n 30 7 n g -- m � � li-4 „� 73t0 ^ry �� 1 n m in �n �—z (`f Cy N R ��2 r 12 � �L �ass �. ° n � r � � � m� °�� ° � n r a � m�� n 7i8 �— 9. �y c� 5278� 527 527 �a �a m�o <o�o I m I �n v� v� v� 5278 +` ��a in ;� � CNNNNGYCV t N f N f�t N N H N N N N ��m �' szrz sa� Sz� �'°� s27., � �5t8 �+ �j r m �n -- � +71 rn �n 5260 5262 18 G2fifi 526 w m m'+ "a m� m w�a �oj °m �°0 52fi 28 SZfi N N N f cV �� cv I N N I cV � C{ j fV � N� 5z=6 526 5256 sz�o�szs� LOUISA AVE sae: e ce s�y�s� � ,� �I saso szs saw szeo i250 p � �94 525 Q w � c�u �n m� � �� m� �a �nj �c O g2 „1 � 5255 4 -� � f � � N (+y N N N N � cV cV � N N M � w� a ,'N 524 Z Q 72 T 517.,�j 5 T 7> 5248 �24 � v� �� a �n Z � 524 � irs i. � us �,.y � � � � � �' � w til �23 SZ SZ38 � `° �D � � � ,g �o ,B �g iG tp �n v c v v v v - 5 N N lV ( N. ry � IV I(V N N N� Pi CY � Y Sa4' N N tV N lV I N C 719a 517�Sj7 5242 24 CLEr1f2V€EY� AVE � 4 52 , 5Z3 523 CLEARVIEV9 r -�� 523$ 5� } u� v � n r1 n `O `'' � 'r ° 523i 522b n° �� °� = j s2� - sa�r �- � �. .� �. 517 517 523 Z3q N� N� N N I c��e � c�QV `A I 1O � �D I`g ��II cv cd c.� � cv cv� c 7t80 5230 � u� — n rn �n N N,.� rn �� p� 522 52Z 522 in rn�s I v� n rn. 5170 5 t 6 522a � �° .,� �� n�'°� � I c� �v I _� o 0 0�a �n �n I n m aa u� �rI rr 22 �o �e � w � m w��o %c �o w�n ��n v� �n 5219 52l 521 N a� �v' w! cv j c�v I: N �'V N [V N N N I[V [V N N fV N N tV N "� � 5ts 516� 52te 5�1 RIdGE LAN� I �� R � �sssts szt '� ^� � o4N m� a ro I c7,e 521?.� 3a13 � I 52i 52i� ,c I fa � � ( � I � t � I � � :y � c�. � 'n � hl �n � 721 � � � � � v � � N � N N fV N N N( y P N C Vicinity Map; /��7-96 2535 Hzghway jp %�pplicante Land Patterns Landscaping � --- - _ � �I �� O �� VI� � I�d� PI��A�'I�2� AP�U�ANi: ! ��'��:•..1 �c- � ��,/�� — A _ Phon�� `��53 ADO��SS: ,� a ) v', �J , . ,J. lL,.� �-- � � _ :.J� .� _ . �.,,� j t� . Stre�i Ad�r�ss, �ity, St�ia, ar�d �'tp Ca�e Interest ir� Pro�etty {c�ec�t ap�ropriate bax): � dvener oi Pr4periy [,Z CanUacY far �e�d Owner � Lessee, Operat�r, Manager (� Agreamerrt to F'urc.°�asa Q Other (exp(ain}_. �� _� � OouamePr�ry evid�rt� crf applicsr�t's +m�e�e ir� th� prco�+ may 6� r�uire� beior� inal Giy ��n af �sia r�u�s� ..a. + ' +4� _ �. . � �ll. . �..—.�—.._:...—,...__.�._.��.,��►+�1r��1�X�i��!�.�� -�'� *^�. .. �' � •.�..' �r^ ' .,_- ' ..._. •... . ...._ . _..._ . ......... _... . ... L°�2.� ��dil��: 1�2.Ct'I�� resent Use (c:��cic app�aQriare �ax): ❑ Undevel�ae�/Vacant Q 5+ngle t=ami'ry Oweiiing , - - C DupfexJTwd rami�y awellir►9 ; . _.. ._.._. . --� --------------- ._._. --: -. \i � Mul�-�arrsiiy {Na. af Ur�iis �) ,� BusinesslCarnmerc;af Esia�lishri�ent [{ Irtdvstrial �stablisa�ment _. . Q OtYter �expiain) Praoerty C�assm�iion: FEbUE�T: � �� . 3._._. MI ❑ Torrens L � � /bl � °°Eease noce; Acc�ic�r,t may be rescensible for aaci�anal ;ees associac� wittt the review ar this raguest i�°iE=tE�Y G�E:��,F'i� THAi i[-°E ,480V� ST:�, ��c.�tE�i A�E i�; UE ' Siarrai�tr� ��p� �� 44� Re�oninq V drtorts� Us� r srm �� R7� Oevaiao.lSit� ?le�n Aevi� �IryOf SUp(a1VIS19f7 i�fiBbDP SIi�7Y1�R :.:.d190_ �18t7 r�fn6`-81dPT9�ITt 'r'V�4{8f18 r�e�f8f8%1Qd1 C��tTP9lf 'M�qarsd �urfef r�s�mrY �iann�ng a'7gn AU D i-U[J Ame�nam�rre 52001a�r�. minimusn �[!�. ;n�mum Si,QCA FFi � �-2 - �. �I axPt�rs S°'ctl6 f3-1 �a r%�Z 575,�i a�evs SZ4a �i� S7C9/�cre, minimum 1CO.;s9ffiamum S:utl S7 .� S�,SQ pIL6g SL�� a84GSit �� Sa0 oius dedcsd ceterersin�a �v Stffi# S� 0 . �� .� 515� P�ait F,:n� Deciiea�on Fse C�a� Ps.id r.�81DY �iiJ&7lpi�]f i ot� �a� Fsid Oaxa ?:.i� I�BipY i�Um�@P Adaitions! r'ae r�ad Care �� r"l�eiat �Vurrliser �ar� a# nna! ar°°.:ar� �' % - 7 i j / / �/ '' � CP 7�� f O�• ,dPP90V�J f�„' OENIt� y ;,�$L�; — � J� `„ { �� m � � � � Q� U, �� r°!enn�ng C�s� �la. � ^amin. ,;�; ^.urst �'Vo. � � � �\ ��; 0 z u� r n �� I� ,� O a � N O � 0 � v i �� \ � � � � � ' � i `�� e W�� 8 1-1 �'� 1 1 � s � a , � . � e � ��,�—.� � a ° ` - 8 0 l � m � � @ � $ ^ � �I --- - - - . . . . . _ C � � � � � 9 a 1 '� n 1_ i� a � � i� . � ; ,. ,. , ; , � �� Z s�wv� � satno�a s,oiavw ��S OOb'4t . qZ ', ° �:� �, � � SOItl9tld ViOS3NNIN - � �� 000, - -� 8 '�'s uo�`i — 6 .. .. . . :w�� t�� r. ; � � `��`��, S L��=y: i�::.� ,� \ �1°�£.� 1r�� "`,� �Ut)'t'�J� �� AoLC,^�Cs � � A \ � s �-�;,J C� 'ei �� ,`t�' n-+ar � � \ °°`, r-� �' :... �.. ,� _ � �6 \ 9s �/ . Ory7 O Or� �`.,\ e pl � o��P � / , . �J \ � ,� ` �jy I ��l��%' �'�� i��il!i � �`�� , � , �`.� '�s � o � ., . . � , ,, � . � � N`JIS ttOlAd - .,� k, „__a�� . `\\ � I I - � /-�� `- � ; , . � � 5 . , , oz az Ol 4L L�� E4 �L'S 9l , .� � �.' '� N \\ \ ��``. �) ° � � � ;. °� \ �� ., —� �'� ! I . . ,\ i ; 9 � L4 Bl 6lpZ � .� ; � I } y N m � % ., ea � � . . , ��\ �� —� � � rvt g �" n r a °o �j � suonoi� iasana �. , � : � � 8 -- � snaa asaANS oy , '^ b° `" ''�J Y� I ;' y �_ _ — < < f ; a -- _ " � � ' i B ,, -_ — � . I : s ; � s._ � - ., ,� s � � . � � � � ,� �, ; � '� I. g _��.�_�_��v.�m��__mo��__��m@,�m�s��..�_��.�_.�� ' ��.' ��o�.��-�. cses�� a�d�oa9�s i aeaa A.��no� , . .. ;.:. - --- - _..; ----- . - _ -! � ! i'. . � , . _� - � ,. � , . . . ' ., . _ . : _. � ; . :: .:, _ _ . � . . - - - : ';: ;;: , ,. __. .. . _ .. . ,. _ . : Nu��ry �r�e! Lancts�ape Con�racfor� . R�ut� 4 0�o� 3'74 a l��nt�, M��e�o�� 55Q4G .- .:: ; _� ;:_ _ - _ - , , . _..,.. � _....: _ �. - , _ _ �.; , - � � a � _o � �I � fr �rCd � � .. �. .. .. .� .".: �_i. --, '' . .::: _ � ---. ._ �. � :.., . 1 e , , � ::__. p� . . �' _ �" _ i� U�� s �.l ` ' _ - , ...L �l �� r� �.� s �_ , _ _ _ _. ._ _ _ _.. _� _ � � �o �v .. _ _ . .. . . .. _ : _ _ _. .__: �� - - _.... . ... , . . : -- � � - _ , ��c� ; � -��, �; .. - ; . =� r _ - � �s �.� _. -- - - _ . _, _ __ _ ._ _ _. _ _�_ _. . .. � � �� - e ' , �: ,i �� : - ` : �v� '> . . ._ _ : ' � :� d/t �� S�? , :.��1 d �t°, .� � G'��y - . . __ �. . _ : _. , . , � :. . - ��.1�L�S�� , . . � i .�.> -c7 � - � �� 9 _ . _ . . - _ - � � .t � _ _ .. _. - . . . ,.., :. . :` � - , � - ; _ . . - ��ic f�! ��'�� S r��E. - : ` ` - _ _ - - . .. _ . ,, � d .: ^ _ . �� o L.� t.c1 � C�� .. , ,. � .; - � 15 �1�1� �� _. - _ �'►�J��-, � �S _ �i��,�G � � _ . .: . '. .. .. . _ ._�. r . '.-'.__... . .,. � . ..-- - � ��J� �-l� _ ,_ _ _ . , _ � s �� . . _ ; _ . . .. _ , . - _.. �� .. :. :. _,, ,..._ .. _. . ._ . _ _ . _ �. _ _. . . . . ,__. __ c �� . , . . ;.. .- .: � .. _. _ ,, . � � . , ,, . . .� � . . - �.�-- � �� .�9r�o'`J' , fD �� ' - 1 r,�v �c, r.� . - ,.. _ ; ,. _ , - - . , .. .. . _ _ . . �: _; . � _ , I�qv� ��1��s �j��v�� m�. � ��o_�- - - � �- _ - : . � _ : . . . . . � _ ,-: _ . � ,, . _.� _�. . : - . , f..�i! �/�. : _��C`��O �r� (.: . , ��f'C.� `v°�c�rri . _�-X��..S"��Cy _.. - : .. _ U �C�-� �Sr�� rJl� f�� C,�G � .Lo � �t��° - _-. __ . _ ._ , . ; ._ , - � f lo vL J C'o.S� s � �9 : t%� � �� `� - ��`%�� V � - _ _ �jf�G, � : � � Gcif f°,� � l ✓�% �%��'1 p e� : ��LCs �T � ��, :�. _ _ , . _ -- v _ _ _. ; , ,. . _ ,._ .. � ., �� , . ;� � ��ca� � � �� .;, _ � , :, � � � � °� �� a � `��/ �. : ,�'�- I � j�� :5' -.-� �� f'�.�.�5' � 2�. �"�� ,�,� � �-/� � �l�s f� � d � �� ..�.��,� �, 0 r�%� � � /�� ` � �.�c� S� � r� , � .�-��..� .�j � �G J It�S�' t/j�-'�,i � v� �.� �� '� .1, i e� %q�� f-�� J� �� %� �� %�� ' � �� C e � �� . , ��'� �� `�'� �s�nt� �� @�� ` � � �� , �, � � �f� �%.��,� �//�^/y� �/ /... .. _ N. J 1 ! . � .. E PRODUCEfi E'�R1STS' MUTUAL lNSURANCE COMPANY 5t LO[!iS STREE7. f Edwardsville, IL 62425 ir+svaeo Narren Scharer Larsd Patt�rns 27701 University Avenue NE Isanei, MPI 55040 OAiE �MM10p1YY1 ��: > ;..:��. ..�� ° : �1-OCi-4b TH[S CE�T[F[CA7'E IS iSSUE9 �S A AAA7-7"EFi OF IAIFORNiATI01V aNLY AND COI�lFERS NO R[GHTS UPON TH� CERTiFfCA7E HOLDER. TFlIS CERTIFICATE DQES iVOT AME�dD, EXTEtUD OR ALTER TH� COVERA�GE A�FaRDED 8Y iHE POLICIES 6ELOW. COMPAh1V A FLflRISTS' MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY COMPANY � COMPANY C COMPANY a ,.;. ,.. , ,:, , :: . . ><:_,... ;. ,:. _,.. ;.:> <..._ ,. _... ,.:.,: ... _ :>, i?ilS IS TO CERTEFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSUHAt�lCfl L3STED BELOW HAVf B�EN iSSUED TO TNE INSURED f3AMED A80VE 1=0ki ThfE POLtCY PERtOb lN�IGATED, NOTWITIiSiAfVDiMG ANY Rfl4U1REMEPlT, TERM O� COiJDITION OF ANY CONTRACi OR OTFiER DQCUMENT W1TSi RESPELi TC3 WHICFi 7F#IS CERTIFfCATE MAY BE ISSUED Oit MAY PER7AIt�, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED 9Y THE �ALICtES DESCAIBED FfERE1N IS SU9.lECT TO ,kLL THE TEAMS, EXCLUS{ONS AtJD C�PlDITIOfVS OF SUCH pOIiCIES. UMITS SFiOWN A9AY HAVE BEEtd REDUCED BY PAIB CLAlRAS. C� " POIICY FFFECTN£ POLICY IXP1RailON . LTR I TYPE OF IMSURANCE PdLICY NUMBER 6AP6 IMM/DOIYYI DATE (MMlDDfYYI LIMfTS ��L �8'�Y � � GENERAI AGGR£GATE 9� 1, OOO � OQO x CDMMEHCIAL GENEAaL UABiLITY PROOUC"ES�COMPlOP AGG 4 1, 000, OUa � A'� CLAIMSMAOE �accuR BA 04806 05/05/96 05/OS/97 PERSONAi.&ApVINJURY s 500,OOU OWNER'S & COMT PR4T 666Q � Eacro accuAA�ce S 5�� AUTOMOBILE L3A61LliY ANY AUTO . . ALL OWNFJ) AtfTOS � . �. , ��;I SCHEDULED aUi45 �^! HfREA AU70S � NON-OWNED AUTOS GARAGE LIABILfTY � ANY At1T0 i . pCCF,.55 UABlL1TY 3 UM9REElr4 FaRM i 6THER THAN UMHREI.LA FaRM W6AKFAS COMPENSATION AND q ` EMaIOYERS' LtA81LETY TFIE PROPRiETOR! (N� PAATNERSlECEC1fTIVE OFFICERS ARE: �' OTNER I � -.crolp710id 06 OPERlA i FiRE 6AMAGE IAny one lirel S � 0�, �� MED FX? (Any oao persant s Z OaO •��_..— i COM8INED SINGLE �iMl7 g BODIIY INJURY IPer garsonl ' 60gILY INJUAY I IYer accitlenU s PROPER'TY DAMAGE ' g ( AUTO ONLY - EA ACCIOENT I S aTHER TkAl1 AUTO OPtLY: '"' � EACi4 ACGDEN7 g AGGREGATE 9 EACN OCCURRENCE �y E AGGAEGATE $ S �.�,.� ..','.i' � �. S7ATUTOAY UMiTS . �' -� IdCN 11948 05/OS/96 OS/OS/47 �cH accioErrr S ♦� �' 6660 OtSEASE • POCICY LIMff � � . _ . DISEASE - EAClf ONALOYEE I � ' . ,: _,. ,. ; ; . ; , ; � . �: - -:. ' CENTRAL PLA2A 45th & Centrat Ave. N.E. Minneapolis, Minnesota CRYSTAL SHOPPiNG CENTEI2 Bass Lake Road & West $roadway Crystal, ,�tinnesota DODDWAY Si-IOPPING CENi'ER Smith & Dodd Road West St. Paul, Minnesota LEXINGTON PLAZA SHOPPES Lexin�ton & I,arpenteur Roseville, �tinnesota �E��o�ra P�,�z,� State Hwy. t 1Q 8c Dodd Road i�lendota Heights, N[innesota ViOUNDSViEW SQUr\RE Hwy. l� & Long Lake Road Moands View, �tinnesoca VORTHWAY SHOPPiNG CEVTER State Hwv. ?3 & Woodland Circle Pines, �tinnesota STBLEY PLaZr� West 7th Stres[ & Davem St. Paul.,Vlinnesota SOliTHVIElV 57-30PPING CENTER Suuthvietiv Blvd. �Yc 1=th Ave. S 5outh St. Paul, �tinnesata � DEVELOPI�IE�i'T AND MANAGEMENT OX' SHOPPING CENTERS 2227 UniversityAve. • St. Paul, MN 55[14-[677 �6l2-b46-7901 � Fax fiE2-646-[389 Octo�er 30, 1996 Mr. WaPren SCilOfei Lar�d Patterns 27701 University Avenue North �as�t ls�nti, (�N 5�403 Re: Christmas Tree Stand �ridgemar� Lot/�lloundsview Square Shopping Center Nloundsview, MN 55 i 12 C�ear Mr. 5chorer: Enclosed, please find a fuily executed copy o# the Lease Agreement for your Christmas Trees Operation irt the Moundsview Square Shopping Center. As you are avuare, it will be up to you to get the necessary peddler's license from the City of Moundsview. I taEked to A/!r. Jim Erickson, i84-3055, who advises m� that in a!1 prababifity, the license will be issued withouf going before fhe council. 1, however, do urge that yo{►,., get that license soon, so if they do insist an going befare the counci .: ? there wif[ be ampfe time. I trust you have made arrangements far the necessary insurance as called far in this �et�er of Agreement, and if we can assist yo� in any way, please let us know. S�St fe��CdS. Very truly yours, PASTER ENiERP�i[SES VI%. . �8f1E:� Vice President i�EB� �Sf8Y8 V1/R��G@W \'� � DEVELOPMENi' AND MANAGEVIEIVT OF SHOPPING CENTERS 2227 UeiversityAve. � St. Paul, MN SS114-I677 � 612-646-790I ^ Fax 612-64b-1389 �ctober 22, 1996 C�NTRAL P(,t�ZA �r. Warren Schor�r 45th & Ceniral �ve. N.E. ��ry� PattefrjS �tinneapolis, Minnesota 27701 University Av�nue lVorth East Isanii, NP�! 55403 CRYSTAL SHOPPWG CENTER �e� Christmas iree S�and Bass Lake Road & West Broadway �ridgeman Lot/Nlouncfsview Square Shopping CenteP Crystal,,btinnesota jVjOlinC�SVI�W, M�j 551 i2 Dear i1�r. Schorer: DQDDWAY SHQPPING CENTER . Smith & Dodd Road ihis letter wiil constitute our Rental Agr�ement for the above �aptioned West St. Pa�l, Minnesota premises. LEXINGTON PLAZA SHOPPES Lexington & Larpenteur RoseviEle, Ylinnesota �tENDOTA PL,AZA State Hwy. I I� & Dodd Road Viendota Heights,.Minnesota PARiI�S: Warren Schorer d/b/a Land Patterns; {ienant), and Nlounds- view Square Ass�ociates, LLP; (Landiord}. T�RM: Premises (the Bridgeman parking Lotj are rented for a period commencing fVovember 29, 1956 and expiring on December 2�, 1996. Tenant shall be granted the right to commence setting up �he Christmas Tree Stands on Novembee 25, 1996, and removing aiE trees and structures no later than December 3'1, 1996. However, seiling of products can only be done betweer� November 29, 1996 and December 2�, � �9�. COfVDITfON 0� THE PREMIS�S: Premises are leased in an '°as is" rNOUNDSVIEW SQUARE condition with no obligation on the part of the Landlord for any Hwy. l0 & Long Lal:e Road �p�St�UCtlOf1, i8[710C��11t1g, or repairs. �tounds Vie:v, �(inneso[a YORTI-f�V,�Y SHQPPlNG CE�fTER State H�vy, ?3 3t Woodland Circle Pines, �tinnesota SiBL�Y PLAZA West 7th Stree[ �Yc. Davem S[. Paui, �finnesota UTNViEZV SHOP€'ING CENiER Suuthview Blvd. & i3#h Ave. S Suuch St. Paul. �linnesota RENTAL: Rental for this period is One Thausar�d and 00/100 Do!lars { S 1,000.00), due and payabie with the execution of this Lease Agree- ment. UT1L1T1ES: Landlord wilf affow Tenant to hook up to electricity for the Tenant`s use during this period. Tenant shall be responsibEe for and pay promptly for ai! efectricity conscamed within the premises during the Tenant's occupancy, SALES: !t is �greed by Tenant that wi�hin ten (10} days foilowing ttte last day of occupancy, ienant wiff suppfy Moundsview Square Associates uvith the total number of Christmas Tre�s sold during the term of occtapancy. .� .�, �+ � i, r.�r � �: � �1 � I`r .�; -i� �._ 1; � � �. _ _ , ��.. : , : .s �� ; ��. � � - �� : �� °� ,,. !, ,�'. �; ,.� . � � c�, ; ;t, t .. 1; ,, � �. ;�, ',�, �, :�' •� .: �� : ,. � ��. ; �: '' 1. .' .�,;! •, , � � ..___ � { . . . ; _ �. .�;'��. _ � �� . .�, . ,. � ,. .. �, �, : : . �, °, .: : � ; .. . , - : � '. � , 1 • �; '. ::. ' . � �; : • ` . ` � , ''. 1 . , 1 > + . ", �' l� �� -� �`- i '. �� '�i. . i . �.�� .' ` ' ��'` . � 1 � �- 'f . WHEREAS, Warren Schroer of Land Patterns Landscaping has applied for a conditional � use perznit to allow outdoor sale of Christmas trees from November 29 to Deeeznber 25 in the parking lot for the Mounds View Shoppzng Center at 2535 Hi�hway i0, which property is zoned B-4 and is described as follows: 1'a�-t lying nor°thetaste�°ly of the centerline o,}¢°State T'a�unk I�i�hway 10 of NE 1/4 of IVl/Q (Subject to I7oarls ar��l �It�hways) in .�ectio�z, 7, Totivnsdiap 30, Ra�ge 23 WHEREAS, the Mounds View Zoning Code atlows open and outdoor saies in the B-4 Regional Business Zoning District with the approval of a conditional �ase permit; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents regarding this proposal: a. Zoning Map b. Planning Application c. Diagram illustrating proposed layout d. Letter af Request e. Certificate of Insurance f. Lease Agreement with Paster Enterprises WHEREAS, the Planning Commission makes the following findings that the criteria for approval in Section 11 I5.04. Subd. 2 has been met: a. Outdoor service, sales and equipment rental connected with the principal use is luxaited to thirty percent (36%) of the goss fioor area of the principal use. The shopping center contains 102,035 square feet of building area. Tl�e appIicant proposes to occupy 1600 square feet in ihe parfcing lot, which 'is 1.6% in comparison to the building square faotage on the site. This criteria is met. � b. Outside saiss ar�as are fenced or screened fram view of neighboring residential uses or an abutting residential district in compliance rvith sut�divisions 1103.Q8(I} through (5) of this Titie. The parking lo� by Bridgeman's Restaurant is does not abut any residential properti�s, and� `' is bordered on the easti by Long Lake Road, south by I�,ighway I O and north and east by ihe remainder of the Mounds View Square Shopping Center. The property directly acrass Long Lak� Road is zoned R-1 bu� is part of the 5unrise I�/Iethodist Church property. The area closest to Bridgeman's is %rested and contains a large weiland. The properiy to the south is zoned B-2 and R-4, and is developed as Silver View Plaza, a shopping center, and Wildwood Manor, an apartment building for senior citizens. Mounds View Shopping Center is screened from view from the apartments by a stand of trees between Wildwood Manor and Highway 10. The Bridgeman's site is approximately 450 feet from Wildwood Manor because of #he interverung highway right-of-way. This criteria is met. c. Ali lighting shail be hooded and so directed that the light source shall not be visible from the public right of way or froin neighboring residences and shall be in compliance with Section 1103.0 of this Title. The ap�Iicant is proposing lighting around the perimeter of the lof. (Pending fur�her information from applicani.} d. Saies area is grassed or surfaced to control dust. The applicant is proposing to use an e�cisting paricing lot which is suriaced with asphalt. This criteria is mefi. e. The provisions of subdivision 1125.01(I)e of this Title are considered and satisfactorily rnet. Adverse Effects: The Plain�ing and Zoning Commission shall consider possibte adverse effects of the proposed amendment or conditionai use. Its �udgment shall be based upon {but not lunited to) the following factors: (1) Relationship to Municipal Comprehensive Plan. {2) The geographical area involved. {3) Whether such use will tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed. (4) The charactier of the surrounding area, (5) The demonstrated need for such use. The proposal is for a temporary Christmas tree !ot in the parking lot of an existing shopping center. The shopping center is surrounded by roadways, and the lot itself is at ieast 450 feet from the nearest residentiai property. The short duration of the use will resuf t in it having lit#le if any effect on the surrounding area. The saie o� Christmas trees is a typical seasonal business in a community such as Mounds V�ew, and serves a community need. This criteria is met. Planning Commission Resolution 487-96 November 20, 1995 Page 3 NORi, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that it�e Mounds View Planning Commission recommends that ihe Mounds View Ciiy Council approve the conditional use pernut for Christmas tre� sales at Mounds View Square Shopping Center with the foliowing conditions: 1. The facility shall be allowed to op�rate from November 29, 1996 to December 25, 1996, with an allowance for site cleanup from December 25 to December 29. The appiicant shall remove alt evidence of the Christmas tree lot, and return the parking lofi to its current condition, by December 29. 2. The hours of aperation shall be 8:00 AM to 10:00 PM. 3. The Christmas tree lot shail be located in the Brid�eman's Restaurant parking lot as shown on the diagram su�mitted with the application. 4. Or�e 4 x 8 foot sign shaii be allowecl, to be placed as shown on the diagram subrrutted with the application, The sign may have ground-mounted, indirect lighting, String lighting atong the perimeter of the Christznas tree lat shall be permitted, as long as the supports_ are nQ .ta.11e�_than..10 feet, and the bulbs do not exceed 100 watt�. (Pending fiarther iriformation from applicant)';; t��, ;��' � -w: ,_ _- 6. The applicant shall carry generai liabiiiiy insurance in an amount of $1,000,000. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Pianning Commission directs Staffto forward this resoiution to the City Council prior t� the approval of the minutes. Adop.ted this 20th day af November, 1995 EITTEST: (SEAL) .ierry Peterson, Chairperson Pamela �heldon, Community Development Director l�/IO S � PI�,�1Il�IG CO 33I01� �O�i@�1�ER 6, 1996 7:00 P.IVI. '' �" " 1 ' � : �� Call to �rder 2. Roll Call Review and Approvai of Minutes 4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda __.._e_. _________ae____________________________________a__________�___�_e_aeme______________om_e.,e______ CITYZEI�S: BEFORE SPEAKING, PLEASE COME TO THE PODitJM, AND GN� YOUR FULL NAME AND ADDR�SS FOR THE MINUTES Pi�n�ing Case I�o. 461-96, 462-96, ��ed 4b3-96 253�-2585 Highway 10 Applicant: Paster Enterprises (dba: Mounds View Assoc. LLP) Public Hearing Item: Requesi for approval of variances in parking ratios, and in sign height and sign area. '; Recammendation: A,pproval of variance in parking ratios; Conditional approval of variance in sign height and sign area, 6. Plannin� Case l�o. 4b4-96 2375-2395 Highway 10 Applicant: Saturn I�evelopment Public Informational Meeting Item: Request for approval of an amended conditional use pernut to allow expansion of an existing auto deaIership, the addition af a car wash and expansion of available repair services. Recommendation: Approval 7. Staff Reports/information Items a. . Planning Case No. 460d96: Auto Central; put on hold by appIicant b. Items for Plam�ing Commission Agenda on November 20 c. City Council Actions d. Memorandum to City Cauncil on Improving Communication e. Ptanning Commissioners Journal �. Cha�rperson and Planning �ommiss►oners �Zeports 9. Adjoiunment ��x$#��*��#�#*�� AP`PLICANTS: YOUR ATTENDANCE AT iHiS MEETING IS REQUESTED. PLEASE NOTI�Y CITY HALL AT 784-3055 1F YOU ARE UNABLE TO ATTEND. THANK YOU. �� I �. .''.....'..�'. '.','. `� � � ��"� :: . � _. = .. �:��,/ � ��7 '� � ;i !�° �: � ` `. � ; < � " �;�.t , _. � ° � ,' " � - - _ �: %.�" �: i . - - �_ i .•� � ,,� :� �. .r . * � �-'.. �. � R� w � ' • - ' �� r� � � � , � � �- � _ - � � � � �: * • � ��- . .•� , } r._ r. � .. , � -_:. * � . � .�.•i. , . .. ...:. �'..�.... � .... . . � :.. . .�. � � * � � �� ..� : , y -.. � �. �: � � � � � � ._i � .T z -- �._ � �:� _ � � ! � l. :�.. I� �� ■ r - ^ ! 1 � � �` � � � . � �. � . '�� . .. � j . i � r ��. ;. a _,. � i ' • / �� .� � : .y �� . � ._. .. ._, � � r . � __ � -�, a i �- � • � � - w: : � � � � �' � • :�,. • � � i • � � _ s .. ,' :. � • a �.. � � � �: -.. -: * �- S � . ° � • � �� - � - � • ' � .. • � * - ,.: •.��.� �a � ��.� ". �!` � •.! �:_. � � � � . �a� �,� � �.. � � • � •�:_ �-_ . -... .-.. . _ .s' .- � �. • � � . , w. _ � _ • : . � . -, _ - - .�► �_ .- - +. • . � � _ ,. _ _ ., • _ _� r - - �: ., i. - • � , . �r# _ - r • -�: - �i. .� - ' � -� � •" - s• • ��: � r ' • � - .:�. �- � -� i: �. t��'"^ -•` " :.: - ;� , :i� • _ �,. ' � * - � � - � _ • : j` �: • y t -. " ! � � � . � � %' i � K • s- • •" _ �� •� � '� �• � � � � i. • � � � ��i �:�- A�� -�! ._ _ _ .. ^ � ,.. � � � � • �. - +. • ..: - � � , • .� ''. � � .': F � • t � � _ � �� •^ - ,. cor�versation at 4h� lasi r�te�ting, thaf th� dimensions far �h� p�rking lot setbacks be 20 feet far sit� o# 2.5 acres or (ess a�d 30 f��fi for sites over 2.5 acres. S9�e con4inu�d by st�ting fi��fi the oih�r majo� iiem in the ordi�ance h�d to do wi�h site sizes for non-residential uses in residenfiiai districfs and that Staff is rec�mrnending site siz�s be inc.�eased #� on� acre. Direc�or Sheldorr noied that �fter P9an�ing Commission's rediew of the proposed orcfirrance, Staff is recomm�nding �hat this ordinance be forwarded to the Ci�y C��r�cil wi4h a recommendation of appraval to keep within the 120 day #ime fram� fo� action on this iiem. The Planning Gommission then revi�wed ihe proposed ordinance and made some mir�o� changes. Commissiorrer Mill�r was concerned v�ith liem (b� on Page two, noting that there are usu�fiy 4wo side yards, and {b) s�ys not iess than 30 feet from th� lot lin� if the !oi if on the corner. Commission Ntiller inquired if we needed to identify what side yard we are taking aboufi? �irector Sheidon noted ihat (b) does refer back io the chari, but thaf it is the same side yard that abuts 4he str�et. The Planning Commission disc�assed minimum setb�cks for acc,essory s#ru�4ures such as sheds, fenc�s and garbage enclosures on through lots in residential districts and it was a co�se�sus thai the Ciiy wo�id, for fhe time being, contir�ue witi� its currer�� ractir� of no� requiring them io have a fro�# y�rd seib�ck o�f the s#reefi in the rear ofi the !ot_ They rn�er� also c�ncerr�ed if the ordinance was chang�d tc� the thirfiy foot setbacl�, wouEd the exisiing siructures ir� M�ur�d5 Vie�r �e consid�red f�gal non- conforming uses? ih�y als� discussed �ccesso�yy buiidir�gs in non�resid�ntiai district�. ;: • �:�_ + a.a� � �^ .. � j;,, - � iJ � -t .� < . � ' , . . - „ ..: .:.'.., � �.� �:::...�.... .- -- �. # �;�- M: ��y � r �- �� - •��. � � �^ � ��a -.: ;� �� :: _ � � • • � r s r � •: � � �.; �. � •� • ^ ._ � �:.-.. _ �. +' �. �r� . �•% -. ,� , ��y� � � , . _ � �. � __- �. � _ „ . - .. � � ,. !. _' _ a ` � � � �- -• ^�. .� ;.�/ :! � _ ,.-: !� was decided, und�r �arkin� Area�, to piace �he R-1 a�d �42 disfiri�ts separate fir�rr� th� rerr�air�ir�g residenti�l disfri�ts. Cornrni��io�er �ililler r�oted on P�ge thr�e, itet°� (b), shouEd read, of �iv� feei (5') from � I�f fir°a��...°. �irector �heEdon vvent o� to ��ge 4 nokir�g #hat 4he anly correcti�n is adding the 1� fooi parking se�bae� from �he street ir� all zoning di�tricis over ��1 and it was neafed that t�er� wvuld be several non-ca�nforming uses �,+ith th� proposed 15 fr�oi setb�ck. The Plan�ing Commissior� decided fio remove ihis addition from ihe propose� ordinance. It was also discussed whefiher �his setbac� should be added ifi ii is a parking iot for a muliiple family building (currently ther� is a fve foot sefback). ihe Corrtrttis�ioners w�re co�c�rned with some �f the fourplexes located in th� City thai would be in non-compliance. It �ras decided that they would I�ave ii at 5 feet for �ow ar�d may address this issue at a la�er time. � ��..- . _� - � � .� - . -...:. ..- .-� - � .: � . • � _i � �� ,.s�. .. .� _ _ � , � _ . ... � � �::a � ��i^ _ � �. i � t �' � `� i, ..•.. � . �...' .., R�,.� ._.. ..*.�?� ��*.. t-.. ._� �., ... r _- . _ . �" � i - � ; *' �: �la.-s �,. � <„ !; �. �� i� �: ' , " . - , � -_ � � _ .- _ �. P�ge 9, Sectic�n 9�, c.on�rr�5 p�rking area� for non-residential us�s. Director Sheldon �oted that this is the section wher� �hey are trying fc, . work out something for the �on-�onforming parking I�ts and wrou#d fik� residents to be able to use their existing parking lots �niess when they ga to rem�ve the driveway or reconstruc�i if, if they c.�e� r�ove the driveway to rneet th� rt�vv requirement �nd not Iose their required parking, �hey wauld n�ed #o do so. Sorr�e correcfion� were noted fo th� propo�ed r�solution �s foi9�+n�s: or� Page 1, i�e second to last lin� rnei s�outd re�d "rneet", the paragraph abcave t�at shouid end with an ";�nd" ar�d �n the 4th whereas r�pla�e the word �improvemen4s" vvith "cF�angesn. '�.� . - .�-. :. � , _�,-�, ~,�. � � . ::�� .. �� •• �..• .,,.� ♦., , • .,.,.� i �i�3 ! • � • . + ";,� �� . . • � . : - r ' , . �' " � ; : � � _ ! ! �s^ !� - �-a It was afso nofed th�fi the wordir�g, "BE li FUR7HEFt RESOLVED that this resolution be fonrvarded Yo the City Council prior to approv�l af fihe minutesn, be added. C�mrnissicrner Johnsta� inquired as ta how Ni�. Sheldon came �ap wi#h tf�e 2-112 acre �gure for lot area and Direcior 5h�ld�n repii�d that i# w�s based on the City's existing church �ites. � aye� 0 n�y� ,: � ,, . .- � - ._ _ . . �, f � E ! i. " y � � _.. ,.� i 'i � ' � ! i ! � ,. .. � •�- � ��,� r�+- i Mot�vn Carried ,�,� _�,,_. sr. ` L �°;° Mc�ur�ds View Plar�r�i�g Commissian October 9, 199�6 `'; Speci�l Me�iing Pag� 5 '- .- ;� -�: . . * �, s �^.- �� = � , . Item ��SA I:'; . � ; � :'; ;' ``,. , : ,�; : ,� `; °. <� :; ; . S: �.. IVl�eti�g I)�teo Sraf� Repor� by: Plaa�r�rrag Case i+ iie I�o.: Nove�nber 6, 1996 Pamela, ;heldon, Community Development Director 461-96, 463-96 Requesto The original request from the applican�,lVlounds View Assoc. LLP, was for a conditional use permit for the joint use of parking facilities and driveways as is allowed by Section I 121.15 of the Zoning Code, and for a variance in the required parking ratios for the Mounds View 5hopping Center. After ihe Planning Commission's meeiing on October 9, 1996, the applicant is now requesting a variance in the required parkin� ratios only, and the request for joint use of parking facilities has been dropped. �'et�ieostero I,ocataone PIl� I�oo �OiR1I8��Ifl(� �5�: A�plieable Iteguiation�: AftaCIlII1�I1�S: �acl��-ound: Mounds View Assoc. LLP 2535-2585 Highway 10 07�3 Q-�3 a 11 �-0079 B-4 - Mounds '(liew Square Shopping Center The regulations appiicable to these requests are stated and discussed under the analysis sectian of this report. Zoning Map Planning Application Letter from Paster Enterprises dated October 3, 1996 This report serves as a supplement to the staff report prepa.red for your October 9, 1996 meeting. At that meeting, the Plannzng Commission indicated that their preferred way of handling the parking situation at Mounds View Square was through a variance in the parking ratios. Tlus report has been prepared based on that direction. (A copy af the previous siaflF report wil! be available at your November 6 meeiing for the Pianning Commission's reference.) As is noted in our earlier staf�report, the applicant is proposing to add 5,000 addi�ional j L / PIanning Commission Case No. 461-96: Mounds View Square November 6, 1996 Page 2 square feet to the main shopping center building, just soufh of IVlario's Video, and to replace the two existing, freestanding restaurants wiih larger dinner house style restaurants each having up to 6,000 square feet, The existing Hardee's con#ains 3,750 square feet; the existing Bridgeman's Ice Cream Restaurant also contains 3,750 square feet. The net increase in square footage on the site would be 9,500 square feet. Expansion of the restaurants and the retail building would eliminate 23 parking spaces. The end resutt would be a shopping center with 111,775 square feet and 454 parking spaces. The parking on site w�len compared with the gross square footage in the shopping center, provides a ratio of one space per 246 square feet or 4,06 parking spaces per 1000 square feet of shopping center. A�a�[ysis/ I�e��gaanr�e�edation: Our previous report calculated the parking requirements for Mounds View Square using severat different methods and r�tios for retail square footage and restaurants. The curren� proposal is to work from the existin� base of 477 parking spaces as the requirement for the existing square foo�age in the shopping center. The square footage includes the fotIowing: Use ' Retail: Storage: Dining: Kitchen: MalUMaintenance/Restrooms Total Existing Square Footage 62,005 16,645 8,050 6,060 9,275 102,03 S EYisting + Expansion Square Poota,�, s�,00s �+�,oao> I7,645 (+I,ppO) I 1,290 (+3240 net) 7,320 {+1260 n�i) 9,275 111,�35 The expansion of the shopping center would remove 4,800 square feei in dining space and 2,i00 square feet in kitchen space, and add 4,0�0 squaee feet in retail, 1,04a square feeC in storage, 8,040 square feet in dinirtg, and 3,960 square feet in ki#chen space. The totai square footage in the cenier with the changes and additions would 111,535 square feet. The addition of building square fooiag� woutd remove parking spaces so the total on th� site would be reduced from 477 io 454. The applicant is requesting a variaace in the parking raiio used for retail space, from IO parking spaces per 1000 square feet ta 4.5 per I004 square feet, and in the ratios for restaurants. The current ratio required for restaurants is 1 parking space per 40 square feet of dining area, and i space per �0 square feet of kitchen area. The proposed ratio is 1 space per 80 square feet for both dining and kitchen space for dinner house type restaurants, and the current ratio for fast food restaurants. No parking wouid be required _ ,:. Plai�ing Commission Case No. 461-96: Mounds View Square November b, 1996 Page 3 for syuare foota�e in stora�e ar�as, maintenance, restrooms, or the mali space. If these ratios are applied to ih� square foota�e being removed and being added, a total of 492 spaces would be required as foltows: Base ReYail Storage Dining Kitchen +4,000 sq. ft. +1,000 sq.ft. � 4,800 sc�.it. in fast foad + 8040 ui dinrker house -2700 sq.ft, in fast food + 3960 sq.ft. in dinner house x 4.5/i000 sq.ft. = N/A x 1/40 sq.ft. _ x 1/80 sq.fi. _ x 1/80 sq.ft. _ x 1/�0 sq.ft. _ 4i7 spaces +18 � 120 +lal - 34 + 50 �92 The difference between the number of paricing spaces remaining on the site (454} and the number required by these ratios (492) is 38 spaces. T�aae sta�'f°repo�d fo�° y�ur° Octaber 9 naeei�r�� sho�verl that the raumb�r required was 457s�aces, avlzach nte�nP the �laf. f'erence �vas three spaces �3'o�vever°, lV� IIISCOV�1°B(Z ll il2llt�1Qi�8!ltlCQZ �PYOI' liY OIdY ClYICBdI(ltlQ11S. 7'he squcar°e foota�e ira kiteher� area. f°or� �das°dee's an`l �t°i�lgentan's which ivas bea►ag derleacPed tivas overstafe�l2nrl so ihe daffer°emace tivas lois�er an th� QcPober 9 report The direction fram the Planning Commission ai that meeting was to add the three spaces by restriping a portion of the parking lot and using compact spaces. Fifty one spaces would have to be converted from standard to compact size ta gain three compact spaces. There is a limit of 10% on ihe number af spaces which can be compact size. The 54 compact spaces would exceed this limit. Therefore, even if the difference wer� only three spaces, restriping to compact size would not gain the three spaces needed. The number of spaces needed, based on the ratios, however, is 492 spaces. Staff has concluded that it is sti11 necessary to consider hoth the variance in parking ratios and the conditionai use permit for joini use of parking in determining if 454 parking spaces is sufficient for this site, YQ�°8lliiCC I!2 PCI�'Itldlg ,RQtlOS (PI[81ti81iE� C[dS8 NO. 463-96j The criteria for granting of variances are stated in Section 1125.02 Subd. 2. Staff has prepared a resolution recommending approval of the variance in garkin� ratios, and has included findings of fact wI-�ich the Planning Commission may want to consider. (Please see attached resoiution.) Sfiaff Recommendation: Apprave the aitached resolution allowing a va�ance in the parking ratios applicabie to Mounds View Square Shopping Center_ - Planning Commissior� Case No. 451-96: Mounds View Squace November b, I996 1'age 4 Conc�i�o�al Ilse Perrrii� �Plar�nan� C�.s� �Io. �61-96) Section 1121.15 allows parking requirements to be adjusted, wiih approval c�f � conditional use permit, where there are two or more uses located on the same prog�c�y which have offsettin� paricing demae�ds, i.e. certain uses are primarily daytime uses ��d other uses are primarily nighitime oz' Sunday uses. Uses listed as primariiy daytirn� ��s�s. ar�: banks, business offices, retail stores, personal service shops, household �q�zpnc��.� ar furniture shops, clothing or shoe repair or service shops, manufacturir�g, wholesale and similar uses. Uses iisted as primarity nighttime or Sunday uses include: auditoriums incidentai to a p�ablic or parochiai school, churches, bowlir�� li��f dance hall, thea�ers, bar or restaurant. Section 1121.15 allows up io 50% of the off-street parking facilities needed for nighttim� ` and Sunday uses to be provided by ttze parlcing provided for daytime uses, and up to �0�/a of the off street parking facilities needed for daytime uses to be provided by the parki�� provided for nighttime and Sunday uses. Mounds View Square includes bath ty�� uses. Staffhas calculated how the use of joini paeking would affect the parkin� spaces required, using the parking ratios which woutd be approved under the variance requesied by the applicant. These calculations are shown in the chart below. The chart shows that an 8% reduction in parking for daytime and for nighttime us�s wauld result in the requirement being 454 spaces as is proposed by th� applicant. Planning Commission Case No. 461-96; Mounds View �quar� November 6, 1996 Page 5 Parking Required Using Pariang Ratios (as per Variarice Application) Parlting from Parking from Total Daytime Uses Nighttime Uses # of Spaces 297 (52%) 274 (48%} Sil {100%} Required {from scratch} # of Spaces 2�6 (52%} 236 (48%) 492 {100%} Required (using 477 �s base, and 492 as cap # of Spaces lZg IZg 256 Required if Maximum Reduction Allawed (50%) By what percentage does total S°/a required (492} need to be reduced to 256 x.08 = 21 reaclt # proposed to be provided by 236 x.08 = 1 S applicant: 454 spaces Totai = 39 Reductio� needed = 38 spaces Tk�e criteria far gcanting of conditionat use pern�its for joint use of parkin� are stated in Section 1 i25.02 Subd. 2. Stafihas prepared a resolution recommending approval ofthis conditionai use permit, and has included findings of fact which the Pianning Commission may want to consider. (Please see attached resolution.) The P(anning Com�mission's action on the conditional use permit would be a recommendation to City Council, and the case would be forwarded to them for action. Stafi Recommendation; Approve the attached resolution recommending approval of a conditional use permit for joint use of parking for the Mounds View Square Shopping Center. cc: John Streeter, Paster Enterprises, 2227 Uruversity Avenue, St. Paul MN 55114-1677 FAX: 646-13 8 9 ', , ;�, �, �_ , t � :� �� _� �� r�-: �, �, �� : � �. , � �� - �� . r �� . �; . ; , �.:,, � f� : `. .�� . �1- ��- _ ;1� '� �� i �° • ,� ,I!"� "`� : � � !� ��; ,. _� �;, , ,,,�� .� �� ; � ��_ :.�� : , E�� .. �.,. •� �" �- �� :.., :j . : ;� � , :j: �.,,-' � _ 'j '° ' ■��.- ��. �': r . �� . �\ :,: �' •/ .'-�`, ' ' �R' • � ,� i, .� � . ;� '' . -� ' �'�'. ': :,:�- . I. � �: .�. WHEREI�S, Mounds View Square t�ssoc. LLP has applied for a variance in the parking ratios applicabl� to the IV.�ounds View Square Shopping Center at 2535-2585 I�ighway 10, which property is described as follows: .Part lyang no�°tPheasPe�ly oJ°ihe cen�erlane of'.State 7`a°u�ak I�i�havay IO �f li�E I/4 of'N I/4 (Saabjeci t� Iloads cc�cl Fli�h�vays� in .Sect�on 7, T'ownship 30, I�an�e 23 �UkiEREAS, fhe Nfounds View Square Shopping Center is located in the B-3 zorvn� district; and, � �HEREAS, the site plan for the Mounds View Sguare Shopping Center was approved in 1989 which th� provision of 503 parking spaces; and, WF-iEREAS, the property o�vner obtained approval of a variance in parking requirenlents �o allow the use of 26 parking spaces for construction of trash dumpster enclosures, which resuIted in the reduction of parking oe� the si�e from 503 to �77 spaces; and, WHEREAS, the City has determined by previous decisions that the 477 parking spaces are sufficient to provide parking for fihe square foatages and uses approved for the Mounds View Square Shopping Center; and, W��REAS, the property owner is proposing to make the following chan�es in squaee foo�a�es and uses on the site at some time in the future: Use Retail: Storage: Dining: Kitchen: MalUMaintenance/Restrooms Totai Existing SQUare Foota�e 62,OOS 16,645 8,450 6,060 9,275 102,035 E�sting + Expansion Square Footage 66,005 (a-4,Ofl�) 17,645 (+1,000) 1 I,290 (+3240 net} 7,320 {+126Q net) 9,275 111,535 Planiung Commission Resoiution No. 48549b Novemher 6, I996 1'age 2 Wk3EREAS, the char�ge in the square footages result from the removal of the Hardee's and Bridgeman's �Zestaurants (4,800 sq.ft. in dining and 2,740 sq.ft. i� kitchen) and ihe addition of two larger dinner house style restaurants, and the addition of 4,000 square feet of retail space and 1,040 square feet of storage space in the main retail building; and, 'WHEREAS, the Mounds View Plannzng Commission has reviewed the request of Mounds �Iiew Squace Assoc. LLP to allow a variance in the parking catios applicable to the Mounds View 5quare Shopping Center, as follows: Retail Space Dizu�er House Styie Restaurants Storage, Etc 4.5 spaces per 1000 square feet 1 space per RO square feet of dinin� or kitchen area no parking requirement for areas in storage, maintenance, restrooms or the enciosed mali area W�IEREAS, the Planning Commission does hereby make th� following findings of fact regarding the requirements for granting of variances as set foreh in Section 1125,02 �ubd. 2 of ihe Mounds View Zaning Code: a. Exceptionai or extraordinary cucumstances apply io the property which do not appIy generaIiy to other properties in the sau�e zone or vicinity and result frorn lot size of shape, topography or other circumstances over which the owners of the property since the effective date hereof have had no control. That the speciai conditions or circumstances do not result fram the actions of the applicant. Mounds View Square is the largest shopping center in Mounds View, and it is in this shopping center that the ef�ect of a higher-than-typical parlcing ratio, established by the City, has its �reatest effect. The shopping center has been operaiing successfialty at a much lower ratio (4.67 spaces per 1000 gross square feet) than is required for retail space in the City's parking regulations (IO spaces per 1000 square feet). A parking demand study completed in 1989 by Benshoof and Associates reported that the Urban Land Institute pe�formed in-depth research on a combined total of approximately 170 shopping centers. (This study is a part of the file on the rezoning for Hardee's Restaurant.) This research showed that a parking ratio of 4.0 spaces per 1000 square feet is adequate for all bu� the husiest 19 hours of the year. The applicani kras not caused the multiplier effeet of a higher-than-typical parking ratio on the size of his shopping center. The deveiopment of dinner house style restaurants is noi anficipated by the parking re�ulations which require one parking space for every 40 square feet of dining area and one parking space for every �0 square feet oFkitchen. Typical ratios for dinner house restaurants are one space for every 80 square feet of gross square footage, ta recogniz� the slower turnover of cvstomers. ; Plauning Commission Resolution No. 485-96 November 6, I996 Pag� 3 e. That the variance requested is the minimum variance which wouId al��viate th� �g��, Econorruc conditions aIone shalI not be considered a hardship. The parking ratios for retaiI squace footage in the Mounds View Zoning Cod� �;��:� � excessive requirement for shopping centers of this size. The City's parlcing ratio a.t on� space per 100 feet is inore Yhan twice the ratio used in other nearby jurisdicti��a�y �ai� when applied to a shopping cenier of over ld0,000 square feet, creates a burd�r�sora�� require�ent. The rrior� typical requirement is 4.0 - 5.0 sp�ces per lOdO squar� �°��i. Aliowir�� the use of 4.5 spaces per 1004 square feet for retail space is the mirrim�rrt vari�nce needed to address the hardship. The paxking ratios for restauran�� a�scs �Y��g� ��t excessive requirement for d'znner house style restaurants, since these restaurants have � slower turnover of customers. The minimum ad}ustment r�eeded in parking ratfos ��ar dinner house style restaurants is to req�aire one parking space for each SO squar� �eet a� gross floor area. b. The literal interpretation of the provisions of this Titie would depcive the applic�� i�h�� commanly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this 'Tit��. d. That ganting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this Title to owners of other lands, structures or buildings in the sam� disirict. Owners of shopping centers similar in size to Mounds View Square and of dinner h�us� style restaurants wouid face the saene di�culiy that the appiicant is experien�in� ��a� te� the higher-than-typical par%ing ratio for these uses in the Zoning Code. Using a�atio of I O spaces per 1004 squar� feet for retail space, and .1 space per 40 square feet for dining space requires an excessive investment in parking which is especial(y acute with th� shopping center oithis size. f. The variance woald not be materially detrimental to the purpose of this Title or to other properCy in the same zone, g. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of tight and air to ad�acent property or substantially increase the congesfiion o#`the �ubiic streets or increas� ih� d��r of fue or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property vatu�s. The e�stin� shoppin� cente� contains 102,035 squace feet and has 4i7 parking spaces, or a ratio of 4.67 packing spaces per 1000 square feet. Th�; appticant has nine shopping centers, af which four are in the same size range as Mounds 'View Squa.re. The average parking ratio for ihese four centers is 4.72 parking spaces per 1000 gross square feet regardless af use. The successfui operation of ihese centers illustrates the fact �hai usang a ratio of 4.5 spaces per 1000 square feet for retail space is an appropriate ratio and wilt not b� detrimental to ihe purposes of the Zoning Code. Use of a ratio oi 10 sp�.ces per 1040 4 I Planning Corr�nission Resolution No. 485-96 November 6, 1996 Page 4 square feeC is burdensome. The parking Iat �'or Mounds View Square is of sufficieni size, and the shopping center contains nighttime and daytime uses with offsetting parking demands thai no overflow parking or advers� eflFect on adjacent properties is anticipated. The shopping center is separated from surrounding uses by streets. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission does hereby find �hat the criteria for granting af a variance in this case have been met. NOW, 'T�-IEREFORE, BE Ii RE�OL�IED that the Mounds View Planning Commission does hereby approve a variance in the parking ratios appIicable to the Nlounds View Square S�topping Center as foilows: The parking ratios appiicable io the addition and deletion of square footage proposed by the applicant in Planning Case No. 4b1-96 and 463-96, and as shown in #2 below, shall be as fotlows: Retail Space Dinner House Style Restaurants Storage, Etc 4,S spaces per lOdO square feet 1 space per 80 square feet of dining or kitchen area no parking requirement for areas in storage, maintenance, restrooms ar the enclosed maIl area 2. The existing 477 parking spaces on the property are deemed adequate to serve the square footage and uses in place as of this date, which include the following: Use Retail: Storage: Dining: Kitchen: MalUMaintenat�ce/Restrooms Totat Exasting Square Foota�e 52,005 I6,645 R,O50 6,060 9,275 102,035 Existing + Exparjsion SQUare Foota�e 66,005 {+4,000) 17,b45 (+i,000} I 1,290 (+3240 net) 7,320 {+126d net) 9,275 I11,535 .: . ,.. ; ; . .: , . . 1'lanning Commission Resolution No. 485-96 November 6, 1996 Page 5 3. Prior to tssuance of any building pernuts for changes in sq�aare �'ooiage at the Mound� View Square Shopping Cet�ter, other than in�eriar remodeling, tfie property owner shala obtain approva.l for development review as provided in Section i 006.06 of the Mounds `View IVlunicipal Code. � Adopted this 6th day of November, 199b. ATTEST: Jerry Peterson, Chairperson Pamela Sheldan Community Development I�irecior _ , ;. ,- . .. � � � '; �� ;1 - ,. �1 �` ' � : �; " � ,1�� . i� ��ti , ° � �: ; , � .., :�,: : � ; . ;�� .. �� ; ; � '' � �� ' `_ � '�:° '. �i�; �-- �, .1 ;. "� �; ` '!, `., ��._:��,� f '1 , � <. � � .___ .� : - i ��, � ►� . �. . i, . � < , f �� , �, •:. �� ,- �� .� , . �� ; , . .. _� � � 1�,, . � � ' �'.. �� •� �I�� 1��: - . �_� � � ; �� , °; �� ,� � � � �� - :: ! � ��,��. �, ; .. ,, r �. . , � � �' �,, , ., , x � �' i` _ W�-�REAS, Mounds View Square Assoc. LLP has �pplied for a conditionat use permit to aiiow joini use of parking faciliiies at Miounds �liew Square Shopping Center at 2535�2585 Highway 10, which property is described as follaws: Pca� lyin� norPheasterly of °�he centerline of Stra�e Trr�nk �Ii�I�way X D of'1�� 1/4 o�'1V 1i� (S�bjec� to Roa� and High�v�y�) in ,Section 7, 7'�a�nslaip 30, dznng� 23 WHEREAS, the Mounds View Square Shopping Center is iocated in the B43 zor�ing district; and, WI�EREAS, the site plan %r the Mounds View Squar� Shopping Center was approved in I9�9 which the provision of 503 parking spaces; and; WHEREAS, the property owner obtained approval of a variance in parking requirements to allow the use of 26 parking spaces for constniction of'trash dumpster enctosures, which resulted in the reduction o;f parking on the site from 5a3 to 477 spaces; and, WI-IEREA�, the City has determined by previous decisions that the 477 parking spaces are suf�'icient to provide parking for the square footages and uses appraved for the Mounds View Square Shopping Center; and, WHEREAS, th� property owner is proposing to make the following changes in square footages and uses on the site at same time in the future: Use Retail: S torage: Dining: Kifchen: Mall/Maintenance/Restrooms Existing S uare Foota e 62,405 16,645 8,450 6,060 9,275 E�usting + Expansion Square Footage 66,005 (+4,000} 17,645 (+1,000) 11,290 (+�3240 net) 7,320 {+1260 net) 9,275 Totai 1 �2,035 111,�35 - Plaeuiing Commission Resolution No. 486-96 Noverriber 6, 1996 Page 2 WI�EREAS, the changes in square footages result from the removal o�the H�r€��'� �a� Bridgeman's Restaurants (4,800 sq.ft. in dining and 2,700 sq.�ft. in kitchen} and ihe addi�io� c�� two larger dinner house siyle restaurants, and the addition of 4,000 square feet of retail space and 1,000 square feet of storage space in the main reta.il building; and, WI��.tEAS, the Pianning Commission has recammended thai a variance be ��a�t�d �n th� parking ratios appiicable to this pcoperty such that the parking required for the exparid�� shopping center wouId be 492 spaces; and, ��+THEREAS, the Ii�iounds View Zoning Code allows for a conditional use pern�at �c� �a� granted for joint use of parking where fihere are offsetting daytime and ni�httim� uses; a�d, WHEREAS, .the Planning Commission does hereby make the following findings oi ��t regarding the requirements for granting of a conditional use permit for joint use of pa�ka�a� �� forth in Section 1121.15 of the Mounds View Zoning Code: (a) The building oe use for which application is being made to utilize the off-stre�t p�l�gn� facilities provided by ano�her building or use shall be located within three hun€�r�� f�� (30d') of such parking facilities and not separated by a public way. All o�the uses proposed as part oftf�is joint parking arrangement are also pa.r� oFa coordinated shopping center. Because of the distribution af reiail space and th� �a.x�a��, ii is %asible for customers to find parking withi❑ 300 feet of their destination. A condition has been included in this recommendation of approval �hat would require err�plc�y��s� �o park in spaces behind the main retail building, to assure that the maximum parking is availabte for customers. (b) The applicant shall show that there is not substantial conflict in the principal oper�k�zxg hours of the lwo (2} buildings or uses far which joint use of off-street parking faciIities is proposed. The Zoning Code acknowledges that restaurants are primarily nighttime uses, and retaii businesses are primarily daytime uses. It should also b� noted that, because of its sa�� and the variety of tenants, customers at Mounds View Square would be expected to �oxx�.bin� trips and use several different busin�sses. A� allowance for some overlap in pa.�kiz�g cequirements is logical in a shopping center of this sgze. Pianning Commission Resolution No. 486-96 Novembee 6, I99b Page 3 {c} A properly drawn legal insttument, executed by the parties concerned for joint use oi off- street parking facilities, duty approved as io form and manner af execution by the City Attomey, shail be filed with the City Clerk-Adrninistrator and recorded with the Register of Deeds, Ramsey County. A condiiion has been included in this recommendation of approval that joint parking and access easements be i•ecorded against the property for the benefit of all tenants prior to any development reviews being approved or building permits being issued for the proposed expansion or the dinner house restaurants. WHERLAS, the Planning Comrnission does hereby find that the criteria for granting of a conditional use permit for joint use of parking have been met. NOW, THEREF'ORE, BE IT I�E�QLVEI7 that the Mounds View Planning Commission does hereby recommend to ihe Mounds View City Council approval of a conditionai use permit for joint use of parking for the Mounds View Square Shopping Center wi�h the following conditions: The parking ratios appiicable to the addition and deletion of square footage proposed by the applicant in Planning Case No. 461-9b and 463-96, and as snown in #2 beiow, shall be 35 fO��OWS: Retail Space Dinner House Styte Restaurants Storage, Etc 4.5 spaces per 1000 squ�re feet � i space per 80 square feet of dining or kitchen area no par�ing requiremenY for areas in storage, maintenance, zestrooms or the enclosed mall area 2. The e�sting 477 parking spaces on the property are deemed adequate to serve the syuare footage and uses in place as of this date, which include the foiiowing: Use Retail: Storage: Dining: Kitchen: MaIUM�intenance/Restrooms Totai Eaistin� Square Foota�e 62,005 16,645 8,05Q 6,060 9,275 i 02,03 � E�sting + Expansion S4uare Foota�e b6,005 {-�4,000) I7,b45 (+1,000) 11,29� (+3240 net) 7,320 (�1260 net) 9,275 111,�35 Ptanning Commission Resolution No, 486-9b November 6, 1996 Page 4 3, Prior to issuance o�any building pernuts for changes in squaxe footage at the Mounds View 5quare Shopping Center, other than interior remodeling, the prape�-ty owner shall obtain approval for developmeni review as provided in �ection 1006.06 of the Mounds View Municipal Code. 4. The reduction in parkin� spaces required sha11 be from 492 spaces to 454 spaces or 3� spaces, which represents an 8% reduction in the parking requirernent each for daytime uses {�56 x.08 = 21} and for nighttime uses (236 x.0� = 18). The praperty owner shall require of zts tenants thai employees park in the parking spaces behind �he main retail building to the extent parking is available, ta assure that the maximurn parking is available for customers. Th� property owner shall supply a copy of a notice to the tenan�s of this requirement. 6. The property owner shail submit a joint parking and access easement, allowing for use of the parking area and access drives by all of the tenants in the shopping center, for approval by the Community Development Directar. The easement shall be recorded agair�st the propeety for the benefit of all �enants concurrent with any development reviews being approved and prior to any building permits being issued for the proposed expansion or the dinx�er house restauranis. 7. The granting of the conditional use permit is contin�ent upon the granting of a variance in the parking ratios applicable to the Mounds View Square Shopping Center (Pianning Case No. 463-96.} This conditional use permit shall be deemed null and void, and the applicani must request reconsideration of a request %r joint use of parking, if the variance in parking ratios is not approved. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED Yhat the Planning Commission directs Staffto for�vard this resotution ia the City Council prior to approval of the minutes. Adopied this 6th day of November, I996. ATTEST: Jezry Peierson, Chairperson Pamela Sheldon Community Deve�opment Director i _ <i ,.; , , . , Item ��5B :'i. � , ' .!. �: �� i: 1 1 ... � ;, : i , IVI�e��n� �ai�: ��af� ltep�r°� byo Planning Case �i�e I�do.o Novecnbee 6, i 996 Pamela Sheldon, Community Deveiapment Direcior 462m9f Itequest: The app(icant, Mounds View Assoc. LLP, is requesting a varianc� iri the City Sign Code to ailow a cer�ter ideniification sign for l�our�ds Vie�v square w}uch exceeds the are�. and height requirements. Pet�i►onero �.,ocaiion: � 1',, , � Zonir�gl�a�d LTsea Appi�cable �tegulatio�as: Mounds View Assoc. LLP 2535-25�5 Highway 10 07-30-23a11-0079 B-4 T/Iounds �liew Square �hopping Center The regulations appiica�le io this request are stated and discussed under the analysis section of tIus report. Aitachr�eni�o Zoning Map Planning Applicaiion Letter from Paster Enterprises dated Qctober 3, 1996 Bact�groured: The City of Mounds View is pursuing the construction of a pedestrian bride over Hi�hway 10. It wilt span the highway just west of Long Lake 1Zoad. The applicant is coneerned that the bridge will obscure the identification sign for ihe shopping center. The City is endeavoring to obtain an easement from th� applicant for the ramp. The applicant is reluctant to grant such an easement wiihout the City addressing the possible obstruction ta the visibility of the shopping center which might be creaied by fhe bridge. Staf�° suggested to th� applicant that they apply for a variance based on a visual simulation of the bridge and its relaiion to the shopping cen�er identification sign. The applicani has pravided a photograph showing the bzid�e as it wouid appear from Higliway 10 southeast of the iniersection with �,ong Lake Road, This photo�caph showed that the existing Mounds View Square pylon si�n would be obscured. At your meetin� on Platming Commission Planning Case No. 4�62m96; Mouxtds View Square Shopping Center November 6, 1996 Page 2 Oc�ober 9, 1996, the Piannin� Commission rec�uested more information on how the proposed pedestrian bridge would affeci the sigl�t lines from Highway 10 tfl the shoppirig center. This repoz� serves as a supplement lo the staf�'repori prepared for your Octo6er 9, 1996 meeting. (,A� copy of the previaus staff report will be availabie at your November 6 meeting for the Planning Commissian's refer�nce.) Analysas/ itecoanrt�enri��ion: Staf�° has obtained a diagratn of the sight lines from the Cify Engineer, The City Engineer has estimated that 10 sections are needed for a motorist to see the shopping cenier pylon sign and react in sufficient time to turn at the Mounds View Square, based on the 50 nn.p.h.. speed lirnit on Highway 10. In this amount of time, the car will travel i65 feet. This distance was measured from the intersection of Highway 10 and Long I.ake Road, which puts the car at 919 feei from the base of'the bridge and approximately I550 %et from the proposed location of the sign. At this distance, the bridge appears to be 52 feei� high from the ground to the top of the railing, given the angle of view. (A copy of the City Engineer's study will be available at your meeting.) The applicant's original proposal was for a sign 75 feet in height and having a sige� area of 800 square feet. A.t this height, 23 feet will show above the bridge. The panet identifying the center would be visibte but not the tenant names. 5taf�wauld note ihat most of the trai�ic passing Mounds View Square is commute traffic so motorists wo�ld see the tenant names when traveiing ea.st. The applicant is concerned, however, with both the actual and perceived obstrucfiion created by the bridge for visibility of the center, and how it may affect their ability to lease space. Keeping the shopping center Ieased is in the best interests of both the applicant and the City, Sta#ihas toured four of the other centers owned by the appiicant to Iook at signag,e, and took pictures which will be available at the meeting. We asked tha applicant for the measurements of the signs %r Mendota Plaza, Crystai Cenier and Northway Center which are as folIows: Shop i�n� Center Si Height Si.Qn Area Mendota P(aza �0 feet 430 sq.ft. Crystal Center 36 %et 7 inches 297 sq.ft. Northway Center 36 feet 301 sq.ft. _. '', ; , Planning Commission Pianning Case No. 462-96 November 6, 1996 Page 3 Mou�ds View Sqnare Shopping Cenier The staf�' also observed tt�at there are monurnent styie signs at driveway er�t�� Crystal Center wiih the name of the shopping center. Such signage would provide a visual indicator at eye level for motorists driving on Highway 10 where to tu� to e�t�� th� shopping cenier. An opportuniiy may also exist at the corner of Long Lak� Raa�d �n.� Highway 10 for a monument style sign to be built at the base of the ramp for t�� t��=�d��9 stating the name of ihe shopping center. Such a sign would be visible b�for� rnc��oa�sL� pass under the bridge and beFore reaching the driveway entrances, givin� th��x tx�� t� pregare to tum. After discussion with the applican#, they want to modify the signage package �hey are proposing to the following; monument signage at the driveway entrances on Highway 10 and at the ca�ne� o� Long Lake Road and Highway 10, similar to those used in the Cryst�l �'�� a pylon sign having the same heighi and sign area as the sign for Merad��, �� i.e. 50 feet in height and 430 square feet in area Staff does not have dimensions for the monument signage ir� the Crystal Centex An�Iysis/ Recota�rnendatior�: The City 5ign Code allows a pylon sign wl�ich is 35 feet in height and 340 squ�c�� r�� ir� area. The applicant's proposaI exceeds these allows by i5 feet in height and 90 squar� feet in area. The signs at the Crystal Center and Northway Center are closer to ihe Mounds View ordinance in height, and within the Code requirements on sign area. If the proposed pylon sign is reduced in height from 75 feet to 50 feet, it will no longer show above the bridge from the vaniage point used in the City Engineer's cal�ula�ic�ns (15 50 feet to the east). St�ff does not see a}ustification for a variance to allow ihe increased he�ght and size oithe sign based on the bnidge. Sta$'feels there is a justification for the monument signage at the comer of Highway 10 and Lon� Lake Road, and at �he driveway entrances based on the bridge. Staff also feels that fihere is a need to revise the City's Sign Code as it relates to la.rger� sized shopping centers such as Mounds View Square. One approach would be ta revise the type, sizes and heights of signs aliowed to recognize the need for a center identifcation sign, entry mon�aments, tenant signage, signs for freestanding businesses (such as resiaurants) and directional signs. The size of the center identif�cation sign co�ald retate to the square footage on the sifie oc the site size. �/hen a site is iarger, ii is able to absorb a Iarger sized sign and still be attractive and pleasant. I Planning Commission Piannirig Case No. 462-96 November 6, 1996 Page 4 Mounds View Square Shopping Center Another approach is to ailow the approval of sign pro�rams for larger-scale shopping centers such as Ivlounds View Square. Staff is familiar with this approach from other cities. The Sign Code vvould allow far shopping cent�rs of a cer�ain size Yo file a customized set of sign regulations, which would show the location and dimensions of ail of the signage proposed, ihe design theme, and the colors and letter siyles proposed. The usual regula�ions for the zor�ing districts are used as a reference point for evaluating the sign program, but not as requirements, Sign programs allow flexibility as iong as the overall design approach and a.mount of signage is acceptable to the City. In some cities, such sign prograrns are approved by the Planning Commission; in others, sign programs are reviewed by the Plannin� Commission and approved by the City CounciI. The �,ppiicant feels thai the sign package they are proposing will address the icnpact of the bridge. Both siaff' and �he applicani agree that the 50 foot sign now proposed is preferabie to the 75 foot sign proposed earlier. As noted above, however, staff is concerned about the justification for a variance for the pylon sign but not the monument signs. The applicani is trying to address �he irnpact of the bridge on the perceived desirability of the shopping center for tenants, and to offer better signage as an antidote. Staf� does not see how the Ciiy could teii Siiver Lake Plaza that their signage must be no higher than 3S feet, and no larger than 340 feei high, if across the street, Mounds View Sc{uare is given a variance for a sign 50 feet in heighe and 430 square feet, when the sign will not be seen above the bridge. We feel the 6est way to address the pylon sign is either: reducing it io fit within the City's curreni regulaiions {and closer to the size af the signs a� the Crystal Center and Northway Center, or amertd the Sign Code to change the amount of signage allowed for larger-sized shopping centers amend the Sign Code to allow for sign programs StaffRecommendation: �Ie recommend that this item be discussed at your November 6 meeiing, but a decision be deferred until your November 20 meeting. We need more information from the applicant on the following; 1. A specific proposal for Mounds View Square Shopping Center showing the dimensions of the pylon sign and ihe monument signage at the driveway entrances and on the comer of Highway 10 and Long Lake Road, �i Piannzng Cominission 1°ia.nning Case No. 462�96: Mounds View Square Shopping Center Novembee 6, i 996 Page 5 2. Input as to the applicant's wiltingness to reduce ti�e pylon sign to fifi within. fihe City's curreni allowances (35 feet in height and 344 square feet in area) We need to know froen the Planning Commission if you are receptive to ame�ding the Sign Code as we have suggested in this report, a.nd/or to approving a variance far the monurr�ent sigt�ag� af the driveway entrances and ai the corner of Long Lake lZoad and Highway 10. Finally, one other option the Planning Co�nmission could consider is graniing a varsance for the 75 foot sign, based on th� City Engineer's study, but placing conditions on the variance that ii cannot be used untit both of the followit�g occur: The bridge is appeoved by the Minnesota Department af Transportation for construction, and the bridge is under construction. 2. The applicant affords the City a period of at least six months in which to consider and adopt an amendment to �he Sign Code to address signage for larger sized shopping centers. If the amendment would allow a c�nter iden�ification sign of at ' least 400 square feet in area and 45 feet in height, the variance allawing for a 75 foot sign having an area of 800 square feet would become null and void. Without this additional inforrnation, staff is not prepared to make a recommendation. cc: John Streeter, Paster Entezprises, 2227 University Avenue, St. Paul M1V 55114m1b77 FAX: 646-13 89 � :�j ` `, � I�ee�ing Daie: �taff �2eport t�y: Pianna�� C�se �'i�e I�o.a Item ��6 • �; � . . : � 1`. ! ��; I+Iovember 6, 1996 Pamela Sheldon, Coinmunity Development Direcior .,._.1 lZeque�t: Approval of an amended conditional use permzt and developmenf revi�w �o aliow the expansian of an existing auto d�alership, the addition of a car wash and expansion of available repair services. �et�t�o��a°a I�ocat�ona � �.• � Satum Development 23i5 and 2395 I-iighway 10 08-30-2�-31-0001, 2, 3 Zor�ing/ Iaand IT§e: B-3 The property at 2375 Highway IO is being used for the existing Saturn deaiership, and a� 2395 Highway 10 for an existing Citgo gasoline station Applecabte I�egul�taoraso The �-3 district allows for new and used auiomobiie dealerships, minor auto repair and car washes with approval of a conditianal us� pernut. Chapter 1006 requires approval of a development review ;For any construction project other than two single family detached homes on improved lots. Attachrreents: Planning App[ication Zoning Map Letter from Coyle, Gilman & Stengl� RE: permission from property owner for appiication to be filed Resolution 4195: Approval of CUP for Saturn 2/24/92 Resolution 4611: Approva! of parking lot expansion 8/�/94 Resolution 483-9b: Recommending Approval for Amended CUP and Development Review Bluelin� Package: - Site Plan - Landscape Plan I. . , .. . .. .'. .'.�. •..:� . . ... .. .'.: . . :.. . ."� . . , '.-. : .. . .. .:: ... ... . . : ' . ... .'": ..��. . : �: .:'.- �. . .....'.::. ::' . .:� I' ..:: .' '.. . :: Plannzng Comxnission PIanning Case No. 464-9b November 6, 1996 Page 2 ��ck�round: 2375 Highway 10 This report serves as a suppiement to the staff report prepared for your October 9, 1996 meeting. Ai that meeting, it was clarified that the amendenent to the conditiona] use per•mit pertains onty to the land at 2395 Highway 10 being added to the Sat�arn site, and therefore the criteria regarding the square footage in building area in comparison io the square footage in ouidoor storage fbr inventory should be applied to that portion of the site. It was also clarifted how the requirement far 10% of the site in landscaped greenspace is calculated. These issues are discussed beIow. {A copy of the previous staff report will be available ai your November 6 meeting for the Pianning Cammission's reference. The applicant ha.s prepared a revised site pian and landscapir�g plan which shaw ar� additional monutnent sign on County Road H, and clarifies the dimensions of the three monument signs on the site. A notice has been sent to all property owners within 350 feet of the sifie advertising this meetir�g as a public information meeting on the application, A public hearing wi1l be held on this item when it is considered by the City Councii_ The tentative date for the City Council hearing is November 25. A�aiysis/ 12ecorramendatio�t Buitd°ang a�d S'ste I3esign; g,andscapeng �ection I 114.04, Subd. 8.1. requires "a minimum 10% of the property, excluding setback requiremen#s, is required for landscaped greenspace. The plan(t)ing plan and type oi shrubbery shall require approval of the Planning Commission based upon a recommendation of City Forester. Our staff report for your October 9, 199b meeting raised a question whether the Saturn proposal met this criteria. It was clarified at the meeting that the 10% requirement is to 6e applied to the land area in the site minus the land area in the required setbacks. The total site coe�tains 3.276 acres or 142,703 square feet, The area in the required setbacks is 38,250 square feet. The net area to be used in calculating the 10% requirement is 104,453 sc}uare feet; 10% equals 10,445 square feet. The applicant is proposing to provide 33,506 square feet in Iandscaped greenspace, which is more than three titnes th� requirement. This requirement is rnet. ='; � Plaiuiing Commission Planning Case No. 464-96: 2375 High�vvay 10 : Novemher 6, 1996 Page 3 Si�na�e The existing signage inciudes the following: � existing pyion sign 10' x 10' on 26' high supports; area = 100 sq.ft. � existing wall sign 23" x 26.5 ; area = 54_8 sq.ft. � used car sign, ground rnounted 8' 6-1/2" x 5' = 42.7 sq.ft. � miscetlaneous small directional signs The total signage on the site is 193.5 square feet. All of the signage has approved pec�mits. The B-3 district allaws for 100 square feei per business occupant, and one general pedestal sign not exceeding 340 square feei. Only one pedestal sign is allowed per property. The current signage is witk�in the allowances in the Code. The applicant is proposing two additional rnonument signs: one at fihe northeznmost driveway on Highway 10 and one ai the easternmost driveway on County Road H2. Both of thes� signs would have the same dim�nsions as ihe existing monument sign an Highway 10 (42.7 square feet}. The appiicant's reason for the additional signage is to better identify driveway entrances and direct customer traffic. The total signage on ihe site including the new signage would be: — 4 existing pylon sign i0' x 10' on 26' high supports; area = 100 sq.ft. • existing wall sign 23" x 26.5; area = 50.8 sq.ft. � used car sign, ground mounted 8' 6-1/2" x 5' = 42.7 sq.ft. • two new ground mounted 8' 6-1/2" x 5' = 85.4 sq.ft. o misceilaneous smai( directional signs Total Signage = 278.9 sq. ft. Total Pernutted = 10� sq. ft. of signage per tenant; 340 sq. ft. pylon sign = 440 sq.ft. The signage on the site is well within the tota.l signage area allowed. Square footage has been redistributed to the monument signs from the allowances for tenani and pylon signs. Staff feels that this approac� is acceptable and maices the signage package more functionai. Staff also feeis that this redistribution requires approval of a variance which r�vould have to b� scheduIed for the Planning Commission's December 4 meeting, due to notice requirements. '� I I Planning Commission planning Case No. 464-96: 2375 Highway 10 November 6, I99b Page 4 I1�►scellaneous The applicant has provided the foltowing additionat it�ms requested at your last meeting: 1. Planning appIication and fees 2. Proof of ownership and Ietter from owner of Citgo parcel giving pernussion for appiication to be filed on this parcel Items sti11 needed include; 3, Comrnents from the City Engineer and Rice Creek Watershed District (staffio do referral) 4. Provide copy of map dated 2/19/92 showing test drive routes. 5. Show three ha.ndicapped parking spaces, and convert tvvo inventory spaces to customer spaces, io cotnply with parking requirements. 6. Add note io plans that customer and employee parking will be clearly marked and kepi free of use for inventory. 7. Provide deiait on ptan as to how trash enclosure will be constructed. Shor� concrete pad. These items have been addressed in the attached resolution recommending approval. Sta�°Itecommenc3atior�: Adopt the attached Resolution No. 483-95 recommending approval of the amended conditional use permit and deveiopment review for the expansion of the Saturn dealership. cc: Jim Price, Sattirn Development, P.O. Box 1�813, Whiie Bear Lake, Iv1N S51 i0; FAX 790�9416 Darwin Lindahi, Darwin Lindahl Architects, P.A. 5701 Shingle Creek Parkway, Suite #130, Minneapolis, MN 55430; FAX 560-0441 Francis J. Coyle, Jr., Coyle, Gilman & Stengei, 305 First of America Bank Buiiding, 100 Seventeenth Street, Rock Island, IL 61201; FAX 788-04�0 '3 � �a �� s � . _ � �� x _ � ,4PPUCANi: �-�; . �- �, �,� , ,.„ t r .� s. _ _.-� �A~ - i �� . _ .. __ ��r - � � ��- . � _ . � ! S�f�C7 Inie�esi iet �ro e ct�ecie a __ _.- P �Y ( RPro riaie 6nx : . ._ _ - . _ . . ----- ---._._._ ----... . P ) . _. � O�nen�r �f �rapecty . , �_. ., . _ _ _ _ � Cor�tract for ��ed O�er ._ _ . _. � Lesses, Operator, Pu9anag�r _ � ,4greeersee�t to Purc.+tase . . p �thea° (exQlai�tj -- — Ooaamorr0e,ry evid�n� of applit�rYs irrt�e�f ir9 tft� pr�oa�ty r�sy he require� h�far� final Caiy crP �si� r�qu�L __ . .. .. ... .. _ ._ . �. , _ PA4P��i°i`� INVC)L�/ED: _ . _ . , _ _ Addr�ss/G�n�ra� L�cafic�r� � 3 � , o _ -._ -. L�gad Oes�°iption or Prcperty identinc�ti�n Number '-- - �1 Owr��r: Narne/Addr�ss --- C, �Ca � � �� 7°r��-1r �a.P � Q+� - _ • Present Us� {ct�e�ic apprapRate box): - -._�_ — - . _ __ _._._ . . .._ ___ ---_ _ ---- . . . .. _ ... -- -_.. .. ._. _.._ _._ Undeve�npedlVacar� . _ _. . :. . ._ � .. . . . [� ' Singfe Famify �wse�iing . � _ .. . . . _ . - . : . . ...:.. ... . CI . _: �upleJC/iwo �ami �vueltir� .. . _ . . �Y g -._ ._�. _ _..__� _._----- . .. - - -- . .. � l�Iutti-�amiiy {Na. �f Units " . � ) _ . ... . . _ _t, -- �- : �usin�ssl�ammerca! �siaviisi�ment . . �.-- _ - . � . ❑ lndt�strial Estab[�shment . , -_.:. . ...: _ . • . .. .. ': :: � ..- :: [� C�titer (ex�l�inj _ . - _ �raperty Classincation: � Abstrac� [� i omens � •�� noce: ,4�pticac�c may a� rescflns►ol� iar aaditianaJ tees assac:at� ��i�s E f°iE�E3Y f�E�w�� THAT 't t°"� ,��OVE Si.4i c.�+i�1i AR� i',�U f�aning Ven�nea C�naifrarrai Us� Psemit C�� d,�p� oe��iao.isit� P►aer F�vi�m dAinor Sub�ivi�aon �� s�� c.�,e. =j� ,am�,d�n��e �lVeei�„a ,�tera�ar, F'�ere,r� �'Natfand 3uti�t P�mi4 ' r�!aazning Sig� ��J� t'U� �ev�eric�rn�nY �a0lt�c.°�. minimt,urt S�OQ, ma�uara �t,0� ti-i 9� R-2 - Sr 5. .�i o'dtoe3 �40 ,'�-i 5� r�-� • S°5. �1 aei9eas 546� �S S10�/aua.:ninimtam t00.:rea9rrt�s Sy�%] �,� szso p�� szm� Q�� s�c� S5� oius deocsd dereemin� 5v St�af S�a �� S.:m4 �i 50 ar �trrs requesL Parir o� � Oa�o r�� Reeadci Murn6mr Tc�! %� Psud ❑� �:� ��r�t ra�� ddi�ce�i r� r��ia O�r� r�sid r'�edor �dtam�r � � g� �� o' �'� � �) i 0� ar Sns# �^,�ry ,�FP9�V�� i°7 C7E��II�� i�8� �°, 0� ��° 7°�CP P!arsninq � ��. �`�� %l-4 .�rnirv. Ae�urre No. i'� I� � - — � 766 63 7639 7b 76 7 7fi55 762 76{ p 7635 763 °� � 7fiA5 � 7525 762 � .�g � 76l 761 ;�� z � n n n n 7b3 � 76S � 759 754 .. � 7581 75 �—,� v � a � 7565 7564 N ��j1' N N N � �.Yj 7551 755 7535 753 7521 752 � 7505 75Q4 _,y �F . C��' �A�.� 5394 D� �k '�0 8 � L:J - GrtVOtri'i, a� 5485 5485 5485 55C0 7651 5480 5479 �r� _ 5474 5473 5488 `�75 5478 5475 7641 3488 5467 �°4 54b4 9463 Sq46 5467 5452 Stb' S459 763t M 5445 5454 Sd55 1n 3456 O� sASr 9453 7531 u�i 5446 5447 p.543 ��+��5 �`� Sa47 � a 5440 544� Q F'� p�a g439 __ ',� � a S� 7sai � 5434 s,�a sA �� s43: �:. � sa2s sazs '�� `�� • saa� �� 7511 �8 � 5420 542i 542 541g N I � 5401 �47 4 5415 5414 � n c�"�i = o 0 54t 3 T r 750 � N(4 N N N N S�G Jr�OrJ S4QB N c�! LV N� N N S�SU°J N C N N DR�/E 5395 5394 .�J9 o4i �Om n° m u'Di �°n � n N °' o°' � 5392 Z r N N N N N(V (V N N N N � N 5397 538fi $3$ Q N N N N N N N N N N 9386 5391 � 5380 5361 � 538a 5373 53i2 537 ' 537; 3383 �36g 53fi 53fi4 —� 5357 53$g 5359 5368 5� 5358 � 53� t 535z 5353 ♦ � v Q n c°fi cv �" a a m m 5�5' `� ��FJY (V fV N N N N(V fy �y �r r S3� "JS�, 53� N N N N N N N Ct N N N �� 3xp 53Je I.AMBER AVE S 5337 0� o }' 5338 �j/y I�A�pe py �n q- r� cr iv o o rn ao U s SJ�`j• ,r�s -" 5331 '°° "•' U Lll 1 N M N N NN N N N Ctl N�.5�.7Ci N N N N s� `�� ,��.QS '2e 5323 Z4 PARK Q s3z4 , ' � � JJO S�, � 5317 p p 531 E SJ09 s s�r �• `S'1oa 5299 53Qe �9� � s�p 63 2 '0 53QC O -�✓ R°'x .,� 'r?9� � p 5245 r. rn .a n ,n a� .s �n rn .. � �n w -- �n 529� `L -P }yt�- 529 �^ r` 'D v� a' r r� N N o a rn m i � 'ry {�jU 5287 N ry N N N (4 (NV N N N N N(� [4 N SZBF �O O R°'Z' �� `i . A N r Q Of � N�D v N� i N N nF N �279 , P`Y � v v � Qi O \ 9 � r9 N ' N N N N N cV N � Y N N °JZ%J� 5260 5262 SZ� 329i g v `" °' ^ 5258 52S 5256 g26 S28 8�3 ry� ^g� g I 52fit ' 5250 525 5250 5260 5277 f Sa 52a 52 $�5 0 5292 530 5284 R_ „�, F sza � �, � _ � ,� �, �, � ti r.,� 5� 52 52 e�� e� 5290 5Z99 SZ4 N N N N N N N N � of 7� 4 52.3 SZ3 5�7 CL£AfiV1EYd AVE 528� 528 528 �In ^ `1� N 52� I SZ31 �7� n�� v v r•`�i N 5270 52 5 2 7 . h`�' N �F 5�2 522 Sa�' "0 �'' �' �`+ N N e"°v S26tl 5269 525 S2fi9 52 Z� � WOODALE 7 522 ^�� n 525(1� 525 325 5� 52 259 5250 `L N �219 521 521 w I n`�i� N N� N N N n o 524 5240 .�.ZOS N 52C I �� 5240� 524 �, 52�5249 52 � :::-:;�:` � � r ^ Q,o a� 52_0 52�5 Z g�d5Z39 52:0 523 5230i �„ U . �n ,n �n �n •°n 521 ^� r� �c �n � Z �y N CY (V N N N L`! N N LV IV W 52201 5Z29 � 522d 522_ 522Q522 SZ2 ��0 Q 5206 52fl ��„� � r�� 5210� 521 �= 521q SZ1 52101521 521 sza � �<Q r � �� "%' _ 5Z0 N N N �, N N c� cv � SZOO) 520 5200� 520 320015209 5200 ^r�' �^�' S15C g= _ - 515 ��YOOOALE OR i :i�::::: �:i�:,�:_;:�� ?> Si38 :':';��:):::°:��:' S1d 5150{ 515: I"' a o Q Q'� ,�� ::::.::.:.:::�-:•. 18 N f � n m�o v Si.3ZI '.:.: '.�.:':_'.::•. Si41 'jt SiBS � ' N N N CV N .. ....... ..- g 512� {:::�;:�:;',:�;:;: 513 5146 5175 � Si74 5079 ' EL7GGNOOD _.. ., 'L'i'� `'S 51 0 �:� - 5160 516 'Z 2 I :r:'ri?r:�: :;�:�? + ---... `L 3 =�• 5�25ti 5t36�s�ss JR. I-iIGH ,:� 5tt �_ _::: S�1�Q Sf28 515„° 5150 5159 �C�..��0� "' S108f :" _•:. 5109 z g 1 5140 5149 a � '�:;:^:�•� o z0� 51a5 ti� P� ��j{j�� 5i30+ 513 PUD �' �Q N N{ (V' N 9301 � 51Q 51.�.Jr oR �,od s,a, g ,. �a92 N � ° Sa93 5090 a 509a�5091 � �[7 u� n `" �` "° � 4 saso sasl staa o0 sua 507t soeoiso�s ;ti sa� =o�s so�ol so7r g,�3 �7t SOb9 �" °Q6� } Sfl60 50&1 _ ,L`�� ❑ 5067 5058{SOfit a50f505t _ _06a{ �„� t e05 SdbC� �Bgl 5a40 5041 .'. j}} ^ �n �rs n , n m � � ] . N o o �+ 503Q 5031 r rv ( N °i �` �U4G N N N I N� N SOG� � I fV cV N � � ��. / . �� . ._—��.��= � =�'� ��_ CO��D _� � Vicinity Map: 464-96 2�75-2395 Highway IO � � Applicant: SaCurn Develo�rnent � - � -. � '� . B FRANCfS J. GOYLE (1699-1987> SAMU£L M. GILMAN� ?.C. FRANCIS J. COYLf, JN-" WILLIAM R. STENGEL� JR.° MICNELE R. McCAClN° 'AL50 AOMITT[q TO PRAGTICE IN tOWA La.w oF�tc�s O� Goxz.E, Gzz.rz�r & Sa;�rrG�z. AN ASSOCIA7SON OF A PA�7TNERSNIP ANQ q PliQFESSiONAL CORPOFA7lON 305 fSRST OF AM£RFCA BslNK BLfI�qING 100 SEVEN7EEiJiF! STREET Racx Is�arrD, ILZ.uvois ei2oi-s7�i October 7, 1996 �'IA FP,GS�I�T�E ( 612 ) 784°3462 Pariel.a Sheldon Community Development Directoz- City of Mound View 2401 Highway 10 Mound View, MN 55112 Dear Mso Sheldon: AREA CO�E 309 TELEPF40NE 7BH-047! FACS1MIlE 7BH-0480 Per our conversation ot this date, our firm represents QeCe Energy II, L.C, whi�h is currentJ.y occup�.ed by CTTGO outlet in Mound View, Minnesota. Q.C. Energy i�, LeC. has entered into a Sales Agreement with Saturn Development Company, LLC as purchaser o� subject real estate. Saturn Develop[nent Company has Q.C. Energy Ii's permission to file an Application far Conditianal Use permit. The contract calls for a closing and transfer of title an ar about December 1, ig��. �f yau have any cancerns or wish further assistance please advise. FJC/pl pc : J'on Hoganson Very truly yours, COYLE, GIT,MAN & STENGEL �� By Francis Je oyle, Jra � ��r 1�qC RE.'�'2itl�Ca �p City of IY�QU�UJ 'Y!y 11 �� 1 i �o operaice RESOLLTiI0r1 NQ a 4195 , 4 , �. .s 4 , � .; ; ,. . . . ' � � APPRO�%AF� �I+' i�oNDTTIQNp,Ie USE PEk�+'II`I° REQI7E'S'Ie �Y S.ATiJR�T 0� ST. �AUL, 2375 HIGH�dAY 10�, PL�NNING C�SE No. 335�91 WHERE.AS, Saturn of St. Paul h.as request�d Ci�y approva� an autoxnobil� sales deal��ship a� 2375 Hi.gh�aay I.O; and �RE�S, the Z�r�ing Qrdirzance allo�as �utoanob.�le sales dea�er�h��s in a��3, �i3ghway CQmme��ia�. Di.st�°ict; and ��'�S, th� dev�lopm�n�, as proposed, re�xzres a eonditzonal use permit; and �iE1�S, the Cz�y Council has revie�aed the foliowing docx�men�s regaxding thi� p�oposalo a) Site plan dated I1/9I ._ b) Li.c�h�ing plan dated and �e`rised 1/30/92 , c} Landscape plan da�ed I1/9i � ' � d) Parking plan dat�d 11/9I; and ��SP �he Ci�y Councii has de��ned �hat the proposal is in confarman.ce e�ith the requ,ire�aer�ts af the M�n�cipal Code, specifically Chapter 4Q; and �REAS, the stor� water cont�ois for thzs si�e w�e�e originally app�oved as part of the 14iounds View Business park project and have been rev�e�red and are cons�.dered adequa�� by the Caty Engi.neer; and �REAS, the Planning Commzssion has recommended �pp�'�val af th� conditiona3 use permii� request to the City Councii zn Resolution No, 330-92, NOW, TT�REF'aRE, BE TT R�SOLV�D th3t th� City Cot2nczl of the City o� M�unds Vie�s approQes �he conditional use permit wi�h �he �ollocaing conditions: � Z. Outside ].oudspeak��s shall be util�z�d for �ag�.ng purp�ses on11r. 2� �nzy ��.xze� �e�a�i�s and �zaintenan�e will be allowed on �ite exc��d�,ng majc�r �ngin� o�rerhaul�, t�an�mission replac�ent, and bady warka ; � RE�ALLTTION Ai0 m 4195 PAGE 'i�rd0 0�' �'TrJO A�'��ST m ( S r,,�E, } 3. The hauxs of operation of the fac.iZ�ty shall be 7:00 a.m. to ZOo00 p.ma 4 a Any full� mechanized met�i�d c�f r�ra�hing ca�s shaZl requi�e a condz�ional use p��nit per Chapter 4003.�, Sumdivi�ion D(2)m � C'� �y cars �aken on trade and ndt .�nte�.ded fo.� �esale shall, nc�� r�ma�n or� �he sit� �or a pe��od of t�e exc�eding 72 hou�so Na outside me�chand3zing of acce�sori�s shall be a_Llowed. 7 o A good Ea.��h effox-� shall b� made to erasure �hat tes� driv�ng of vehicl�s ��o�a the s�te follow the route h.�ghlig�ted and descrzbed on the attached �ap da� eti 2/ 19 / 9 2 0 � o A13 �ranspor� truck del.�verie� ar�d picle-up sha,il be eonducted on szte d�ring �°egu].a� business hours. 9 a The c�rzdit�.ona1 use pe�it shali be reviewed at six mon�hs and each year thereafter at the time �f licea�s�ng �o ensure that appli�abl.e condi.tions a�spvsed an the site �re be�ng met o 1Qo Outside advertising sha.11. be limit�d to that allowed b�r Mun�cipal Codeo il o Provide ad�quate on-site parking for nuiaber of custamers expectedo For special occasions, a Iarge� nusnber o� customer parking spaces should be made available. A�'apted �his 24th day of February, I992m , � ' y° Adm�ni t�atc� � .� RESBLUTION NO, 4611 C�TY 8F MOUNDS VIEW covN�� oF �sEY s��T� o� r�zrrz�soT� �soLU��oN APPROV�zr�� x� DEV�zaoPM�rr� x�Qu�sT oF SATURN OF ST. PAiJ�L, 2375 HTGHWAY 10, pLANNiNG CAS� NO. 389-94 WHEREAS, Saturn vf Ste Paul has requested Cit�r appraval to construct an addition to their existing automobile sales �acil.i.ty a�. 2375 Highway i0; and WHEREAS, the propasal would aliow�the addition o� approxi�ate�.y 45 car-�'or9sa�,e stal.Is and associated �,zghting ax�d landscaping can �he site; ar�d WkYER�AS, Chapter 1006 0� ti2e Mounds View Municipai Code �-equires that a development revie�� b� canducted for �his and similax° p�°oposais; and � WHEREAS, �he Mounds View City Council has reviewed �he foll.ot�ing documents �°ega�°ding this develapment proposal.e . Za Planning Application 20 5ite Plan dated June 3� Submittal Narrative; da°�ed Jun� 24, 1994 24, 1994 and WHEREAS, �.he City Council has detex°mined that the praposal is in conformance with a11 applicable requirements of Chapt�7e 11000 NoW, THEREFpRE, BE IT RES�LVED that the Maunds Vi.ew City Cauncil approves the devel�pment review request subject to the �ollowing condition: A.�,'TE�T m {S�1�L) I, The faca.lity sha11, tollowing �he campleta.on oF the addi�ion, be subject ta the canciitions stipulated in �he ariginal City Council. Resoluta.on authorizing the use (Ci�y Counci� Resalution Noo 4195, dated �'ebruary 24, 1992)0 Ac�ogated this 8th d�y af August, 19940 � May��- /„'"" � • . ,Acting Cle�k-Adminis�rato� `� � i E �, ; �; ,:... �� _ ��,. �, � . � :�° _ : ��, ��, �T =, ��: �� , ��: � •: ; . �, ; �; �; �: ; �; ,�; ��, ��; � ' f, �;Is �... �; ��.:°,, ; �; ; `�, �. ��; � :, �. �� . � � ; � '� � 1�- "�� ;� �. �i •` ,� �: ��._ :�: ; -�r ", . � '� . . -. '�; �� :�� ]°�. . . �� :� ��. •. ` :�� . 1� _ :F- . _le `, 1 . ` � ; �� _ . > ,� -- ,: � . �r- ,; � � ,, . 1 fi '1� i - J. � �. .; • '° � O.I f'` • �-, R �e , � ; � '- !� ' 1`-� � � t' . , �:, �� , WH�REAS, Saturn I�evelopmeni has requested City appeovat �o expand its dealership at 2375 Highway 10 �o iriclude the property at 2395 Highway 10, to expand buildin� square %otag� and add a car wash, and to expand the types of repair services available; and WHEREAS, the praperty is in the B-3 High�vay Business District, which requires approv�.l of a conditional use permit for motor vehicle and recreation equipraxent sales ar�d gara�es accessory theceto, and for car washes; and, i��REAS, the purpose of conditional use permits is "to provide the City with a reasonable degree of discretion in determining �he suitabitiiy of certain designated uses upon the �eneral Welfare, public heaith and safety; and, . WHEREAS, ihe Pianning Commission has reviewed the following docuznents regarding this proposal: 1. Planning Apptication dated 10-7-96 2. Zoning Map 3. StafPReport dated October 9, 1496 4. Stafi Re�ort dated Novembee 6, 1996 5. Letter from Francis J. Coyle dated 10/7/96 6. Ciiy Council Resolution 4195 7. Ciiy Council Resolution 4611 8. Site Plan dated 10/30/96 9. Landscape Flan dated 10/30/96 10. Floorplan & Building Elevations received l�/4/96 V�II��LEAS, the Pianning Commission does hereby mak� the following findings of fact regarding the requirements set forth in Sections 1114.04, Subd. 8, 1114.04, Subd. 3, 1114,04, Subd. 2, and Sec�ion 1125.0 i Subd. 3: A, D��aerasioa�a� l�eqe�irerrEent� � �oa�rs ok° �peratior� Minimum Re uired Provided " Lot Area 87,124 sq.ft. and 142,703 sq.ft. Lot Width 150 feet 764 feet Met? yes yes S ' '' ; ; _ - . :.. - ___, , ;: _: Planning Commission Resolution No. 483-96 November 6, I996 Page 2 . �.: � Number of Lots Setbacks � Front - Side Rear Lanciscaped Greenspace Paxking Hours of Operation Single or Contiguous yes yes 3fl feet 76 feet yes 10 feet 1�4 feet (east side} yes 232 feet (west si�e) yes 20 feeY 36 feet yes 10% or 10,445 sq.ft. 22 spaces (service) 27 spaces (empIoyees) 7:00 a.m. - I0:00 p.m. 33,606 sq.ft. 20 spaces (service) 35 spaces (employees) 126 spaces {inventory)� 7:00 a.m. - 10:00 p.m. yes no� yes yes �uslcfin� amd Site I9es��n; I.a�edsca�ie�g (Section 1 i 14.04, Subd. 2.a., 3.b., 2.f., 3.c., S.e., 3.£, 2.c., 3.i., �.1., S.m.) The proposai is an exiension of the eXisting Saturn deaiership. The applicant is maintaining the same axchitecturaI character in ihe buildin� expansion as is in ihe original, and will be landscapin� the added site area so the effect wiIi be on� seamless development. Ati areas which are not in building or Iandscaping will be paved and the pasking area will be bordered by a concrete curb. The site does not border property in a residentiat dis#rict and therefore screening and buff�rzng is not required. A la�dscaped area at least 10 feet in width is shown along a1i of ihe property lines. The landscape plan shows a row of Black Hilis Spruce along the na�th property line of the added site area which matches the existing site. The frontage along Highway 10 will be sodded as is the existing site. Lighting and �i��age (Section 1114.04, Subd. 2.h., 3.g., 8.h., 2,d., 3.j. 2.j., 3.m,, �.k.} The applicant is proposing io install a.dditional light standards on the expanded site area which are the same style as the existing light standards, and they will be located in a similar pafiiern. The originai plans submitted for this development included a detail o�the Iight fixtures which are shielded in compliance with the ocdinance. The light standard� will be in landscaped areas and not in the parking Iot. � With compliance with conditions, the proposat will meet the requireYnent for 22 spaces for cusiomers. 2 The Zoning Code dces not h�ve any specific requirement for paricing spaces for inventory oe display. - •, , Planning Comtnission Resolution No. 483-96 November 6, 1996 _ Page 3 ihe applicani is proposing two additionai monurrrent signs on the site: one at the narthernmost driveway on Highway 10 and oe�e at the easternmost driveway on County Road H2. Both of these si�ns would have the same dimensions as the existing monument sign on Highway 10 {42.7 square feet). The applicant's reason for the additional signag� is to better identiiy driveway entrances and direct cusiomer trafiic. The total signage on the site including the new signage would be: o existing pylon sign 10' x 10' on 2f' high supports; area = 100 sq.ft. � existing wall sign 23" x 26.5 ; area = 50.8 sq.ft. � used car sign, ground mounted 8' b-1/2" x 5' = 42.7 sq.ft. � two new ground mounted 8' b-1/2" x 5' _�5.4 sq.ft. 0 miscellaneous small directional signs Total Signa�e = 278.9 sq. ft. Total Permiited = 100 sq. ft. oi signage per tenani; 344 sq. ft. pylon sign = 440 sq.ft. The signage on the site is well within the total signage area allowed. Square %otage has been redistributed to the monument signs from the altowances for tenant and pylon signs. The allowance for the two additional monument signs requires approval of a variance by the Planning Commission, which is noted in the conditions on thzs recommendation of approval. D. Dr°aenage (Section 1114.04 Subd. 2.g., 3,e., S.f.) This canditionai use perrnit combines two e�cisting, developed commercial sites. Changes in drainage patterns are not anticipated. A condition on this recommendation of approval requires favorable review by the City Engineer prior to forwarding the application to City Council. E. O�tdoor 3tara�e, Sales a�ad Servec� (Section 1114.04 Subd. 3.k., 3.0., 3.p., �.i.} No outdoor sales or servicing is cond�acted on this site, other than custorners v,iewing cars in inventory in the parking iot. There are no abutting residential districts, and therefore, the screening requirements do not apply. �uiiicient space far car inveniory has been provided so it vvill not iriii-inge on required customer, service and employee parking. F. Aecessoc°y �uild�n� (Section 1114.04 Subd. 8.j.} The accessory buildings are proposed. ; �. Plan��ing Commission Resolution No. 483m96 November 6, 199b Page 4 G. I�doi�e (Section 1114.d4 �ubd. Z.k., 3.n., 8.p., 8.q.) The original approval including a condition regarding the use of outside Ioudspeakers, which has been added to ihe list of conditions on this recommendation of approval. The Planning Commission is not aware of any problems regarding nois� or� this site. H. Access/°Y'est Driv� Ito�tes (Section i 1 I4.04� Subd, 2.i, 3.I., 8,0.) The appiicant is proposing two driveway entrances on Highway 10 and t�vo on County Road H2, and remova] of two of the driveway entrar�ces on the Citgo properry. The drivewa�s to be removed are closest to the Highway 10/County Road F� intersectian. This will improve tr�c paiterns in the area and remove a co�flict point, The original approval including a condition regarding test drive routes, which has been added to the list of conditions on this recommendation of appraval. Stacl�in� Space (Ca�° �'ash) {Section 1114.04 Subd. 2.b., 2.e.) The car wash proposed for this siie is for customer cars or�ly and not for the general public. The business owner has fihe ability to control the flow of cars, and the volume a:f '? cars is expected to be less than woutd be the case with a stand alone car wash business - open to the public. The site does not abut residential districts. The area behind the car wash faces a business, and will be screened by Black Hilis Spruce. J. Fuel P�mps (Section 1114.04 Subd 3.h.) No fuel pumps are proposed at this faciiity; this criteria does not apply. K. Ceiteria for t�ppr°ova[ of Coaaditoor�ai LTse Perm�t� (Secfion 1125.01 Subd. 3) (1) The use will not create an excessive burden on e�sting parks, schoo3s, streets and o#her public facilities and utilities which serve or are proposed to serve the area. The proposal represents an expansion of an existing business. The site is served 6y an e�sting arterial highway and a County road, such that traffic can access the site wiihoui �oing through the residential neighborhoods. The site is served by utilities. Because the proposal is for a business, no burden on parks or schools is anticipated. ; Planning Commissian Resolution No. 483-96 November 6, 1996 Page 5 (2) The us� will be suffcciently compatible or separated by distance or screening fram adjacent residentiaily zoned or used land so that e�sting homes will not be depreciated irn vaiue ar�d there will be not det�nence to devetopmertt of vacant Iand. (3) The structure and site will have an appearance that will not have ari adverse effect upon adjacent residential properties. The site is bordered on the north and south by roadways, ar�d abuts a business a,nd industrial park on the east side. The exis�ing siie and proposed expansion shows a aitraciive combination of buffering and Iandscaping around the entire perimeter, and this business helps in creatin� an appealing gateway to Mounds View and to the residentiai neighborhoods north of �iighway I 0. It serves as an example of high quality deveiopment for potential developers of properYy in the area. (4) The use, in the opinion of the [Planning Commission), is reasonably reIated to the overall needs of the City and to the existing land use. The expansion of the Satzarn dealership to take in the Citgo propecty will heip unify this corner, and allow an attractive and successful business adciitional room. Providing more ' room for inveniory and expanding the range of services available ta Satum's customers `` may iranslate into more fiax revenue ta the City. Expansion of the Saturn dealership will also help in strengthetiing the vitality and enhancing the appearance of the Highway 10 corridor. This corridor is very important io the long run economic health of the City. (S) The use is consisteIIt with the purposes of the Zonir�g Code and the purpases oi the zoning district in which the appticant intends to locate the proposed use. The purpose of the B-3 district is to provicie for and 1�mit the establishment of motor vehicie oriented or dependent commercial and service activities. It allows for auto repair businesses with approva� of a conditianat use pernut. The applicant's proposal fts witllin the limits envisioned hy the ordinance for the B-3 district, and its iocation along Highway 10 is logical and appropriate. (6) The use is not in con�Tict with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. The most recent discussion of comprehensive goals for the City was ihe �ounds �Iiew 20a0 project in 1994. The Vision Statemen� from the Growth, Development and Business Issue Project Team stated: "The Ciry of Mounds View wili be tmown as a city with a baIance between business and residential concems. There wiIl be a positive business cIimate as shown by public-private collaboration to recruit, encourage, and retain successful, community-based enterprises with emphasis on job expansion, increase in ta� base, and quality of li%. There will be a 4 �. Planning Commission ResoIu�ion No. 483-96 November 6, 1996 I'age 6 cooperative spirit between the govemment and citizens, whether residential or business, when setting regulations into code. Environmental and aesthetic consciousness will be demonstrated by a redesigned Highway I0, a network of inter-connected trails, parks, and wetland spaces, and active citizen participation in ecologicaI activities." Two goals relative to Highway 10, and a goal on business climate, were adopted and are included in an attachmeni to this report. The expansion of the, Satum dealership furthers these goals, and is supported. (7) The use will not cause traf�ic hazards or congestion. The site has adequate access frorn an arteriaI highway. No added traffic congestion is expected. Eliminatin� one of the driveways on Highway 10 and County Road HZ will reduce traffic hazards and conflict points. (8) Adequate utiiities, access roads, drainage and necessary faeiiities have been or will be provided. The proposal wz11 use a previousIy developed site which is served by earisting utilities and roads. There is an existing drainage ditch along Highway 10. This recommendation of approval includes a condition ihat a favorable review be received from MnDOT and the Rice Creek Watershed District. VSIHEREAS, the Pianz�ing Commission does hereby find that the conditional use permit request as submitted by Saturn Development, and witl� comptiance with the conditions stated irz this resolution, meets the criteria set forth in Sections 11 I4.04, Subd. 2, 3, and 8 and Section 1125.01. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED th�t the Mounds View Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council of the City of Mounds View that the canditionai use permit be granted, and the request for development review be approved, subject to the following conditio�s: . Priot to issuance oF any grading or building pernuts, the properiy owner shall obtain approval from the IViounds View City Council for a repIat of the property to remove ihe lot line between 2375 and 2395 Highway 14. 2. O�ztside signage shall be limited to #hat allowed by the Municipal Code, or as ailowed in any variance approved by the City. Pr�or to installation of the two adclitional monument signs shawn at the westernmosi driveway on Highway 10 and the eastemmost driveway on County Road H2, the property owner shatl Placuiix�g Comrnission Resolution No. 483-96 '� November 6, 1996 Page 7 obiain approval for a variance for sign area aliowed on the site, in sigris other thar� the pylon sign, or for a cade revisions which would allow �iiis additional sign area. Prior to this case being farwarded to the City Council for action, the applicant sh�11 revise the plans to include the follovding: a. A detait on the site plan of the lighting fixtures, showing style of luminar� and dimensions af lighting star�dards b. A note on the site plan siating "�ignage shown on this pla.� is subject io separate permit. The monuYnent signs shown at the westernmost entrance on Highway 10 and the easternmost entrance on County Road H2 exceed the standard sign allo�vances for sign area in the Mounds View Municipal Cade and are not approved as part of this plan. These signs may be allovved if approval of a variance is obtained from the City of Mounds View." .c. Revision to the disfiribution of parking spaces so there are 22 spaces for service customers and at leasfi 27 spaces for employees. A detail shall be '� added io the plan showing how the spaces or areas of the parkirzg are to be - signed �o make it ctear where customer and employee parking are located. �. Prior to this case being forwarded to the City Councii for action, the applicant sha11 obtain written comments from the City Engineer and Rice Creek Watershed District indicating that the p3an will provide adequate site drainage. Prior to this case heing forwarded to the Ciiry Council for actioer, the applicant sh�ll provide the City wi�h a copy of the test drive route described in the map dated 2/19/92 and refeered to in Resolution 4195. b. Vehicle repair, servicing and maintenance are pernvtted on this siie, excl�ading body wark, welding and painting. All ear repairs shati be conducted within the indoor service bays and nat outsid� the service building. 7. A vehicle wash bay is permitied on ihis site. The use of this bay shali be for customers of Yhe dealership only and not the general public. ihe stacking of vehicl�s �vaiting for washing shalt be confined to this site and shall not infer with vehi�le circulation on the szte. S. Any cars faken on trade and not intended for resaie shall not remain on the site �c�� a period of �ime exceeding 72 hours. , < _. Planning Commission Resolution No. 483-96 November 6, 1996 Page 8 9. � No outside merchand�zing of accessories shall be allawed. 10. All transport ttuck deliveries and picic-up shall be canducted on site during regular business hours. 11. Outside loudspeakers shall be utilized for paging purpose only. 12. The hours of operation shail be from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., Vdhere Yhe conditions contained i� this resolution differ from those stated in ResoIution 4195 and �611, the condition� stated in this resolution sha11 prevail. BE IT FLTRTHER RESOI.,VED �hai �f�e Planning Comm.ission dir�cis Staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes. Adopted this 6th �ay aiATovember, 1996 ; ';, Jerry Peterson, Chairperson ATTEST: Pamela 5heldon Community Deveiopment Directar devcases1464-961reso483.pc October 29, 1996 i > > .:: , . . >: Ciiy of Mounds View • Planning Commnission Atteniion: Pam Shetdon Community D�velopment Dire�tor 2401 Highway 10 , Mounds View, I�1N SSI12 , r Subject: Sat�am Dev�lopme�t Req�aest for Expansion Dear Ms. Sheldon: A.s pcoperty owners adjacent to the Saturn Dealership, we %ei we ar� in an excellent positian to a�ree with the request for development of the addition of a car wash and expansian of th� r�pair services. �iher reasons for agr�ement to ihe pr�posal are: � The land that Satum r�vants ta d�velog is undeveloped Iand Eha� needs to be added to our tax base. • It will ciea.� up the nei�hborhoad. • It wiil gee rid of weeds and va.rtnits. � Land vatues wi11 rise. • There will be increased jobs to che community. • They are already good nei�hbors. Pl�ase approve the request aFthe Saturn l�evelopment. Sincerely, � , /� �°�. Cliffiord Bratr 5287 Jackson Drive Mou�tdsvi�w, NiIV 55112 _ --�.: :_. .. ..: -� .;..' :,::, ", . [ . ..._ �.. ;..._ ,. ... . . ... ;: .. .:;:� . .. . :':: . ... �:. . -:.�. :, . .:-�. .: , , p� , . - .;l �-: _ , .,;! ! , ':,� ..,. �:- . . � �_ __-:- r .. � �. . - .�.... . .. .- -. .. .. �:. .:-;,. . '__' _'. ..... .:�:. . _">..... . _ ..�... .... . � �y i ; '1 I�lIOiJI�DS "VIE�1 �I.,AI�tING COI�/i1VIIS��N �ECE�3EIt 4,1996 � 7s00 PoMo REGULAR MEETING AGENDA I, Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Review and Approval ofMinutes (October 2, I996) ��°�' ,' `' `` �ri"''` 4" �'.`� ``., Approval of Minutes (November 6, 1996) 4. Citizens Requests and Commen�s on Itetns Nat on ihe Agenda CTTIZ�NS: BEFORE SPEAKING, PLEASE COME TO 'iHE PODIUM, AND GIVE YOUR FULL I�1AME AND ADDRESS FOR THE MINUTES 5. P[anneng Cas� I�Too 466-9b �� r r�� t�r�� ' ,��3 �' `�'� '7532-7540 Silver Lake Raad Applicant: Larry Beach, on behalf of Richard Edin and Wiiliam Culbert Request for a minor subdivision to move 12.5 feet from 7532 Silver Lake Road to 7540 Silver Lake Road �, ._ �;; 6. �lannia�� Case I`1m. 46$-96 r;� ,"�� . 2375-2395 Highway 10 - Applicant: Satucn Development Request for approval of a variance to allow directional signs at driveway entrances (one on Highway 10 and one on County Road H2) L�.�, 7. Resolution on 1997 iVleeting Scheduie ��t, �1,;,,,,,,,k (, _ rj ,`� *�*�� <,''., .:�.� ��' i'� Planning Commission: Adjourn to Agenda Session j 8. Planning C�se No. S]P-001-9b . Discussion of first draft of Ordinance 588: Commercia.l Wireless Telecommunications Towers and Antennas 9. Staff Reports a. Resoiution 48�-96: Sign Variance for Mounds View Square b. Format for Minutes � c. CarpooIing to Forum on First Ring �` \ 10. Chairperson and Planning Commissioners Reports ... 11, Adjoummeni ��*��:�� t�P�'LICANTS: YOUR ATTENDANCE AT THIS MEETINCr IS REQiJESTED. PLEASE NOTIFY CIi'Z' HALL AT 784-3055 IF YOU ARE UNABLE TO ATTEND. THANK Y4U. ��x�� c:lwpdocslplancommlagenda 12.4 , i ,- , .'I _ _ : ,. : ` ` , n � �, i � 'To: 1Vlounds View l�lanning Commissior� _ Fro�o Pameta SheIdon, Community Development Director Subject: Review and Approval of 1ltinutes December. 1 � Iv�eeting I)a�em D�ceinber 2, 1996 Attached you will find a copy of the minutes for the October 2, 1996 meeting. We could not find in our records that the Planrung Commission ever reviewed and approved these minuies, The minutes for the November 20 meeting will be prepared for your review at your December 18, i 996 meeting, unless you wish them held over to the January 22 if ihe December 18 meeting is canceied. At this point in time, we have no items other than the telecommunications ordinance for your consideration at that meeting. Tlus item could also be held over until January. I '� i � A + \. � , i �" �� •- ��: �_ �'. . . --. � . .. , ,, .. + . _: � • . � � '� < . .. . � � � • �' ^ ; � � .-< , .- �. 2 ' �. � � � A. Regtalar Meeting Ociober 2, 1996 Mounds Vi�w Cifiy Hall 240� Highvday � 0, Ntvunds �/iew, AAN 55112 ,� ��. . T - � � _ � „� .� ��_ { -� • • •� • , ._ _ •. _: i - • �-.. � •�- ..� M�M��$ PF�E�E��: COii'1P1115SIOiieCS �I�I�i, �r�oks, Stever�son, Obert ar�d Chair Pefierson. {Commissioner Brasaerinle arrived (afi� and Commissioner Johnston had �n excused abser�ce. ) , � .. . i- - s� � ! - �i - •• � . • ' � . - ".. • . • �- • • � . � � _ ..". :.- Community Development Direcfior Sheldon wenfi over the corr�ctions that were made to ihe September 4, 1996, minutes #hafi were noted at the last meeting. The followring correctior�s were noted for the September 18, 1996, min�aies: 1) second paragraph, page 5, 1} should read °......#hat they o osed ihe plan, in a resolution for approval, woufd be ina�propri�fe....; 2) page 6, secand paragraph, should read. "He requested,�n ih� interest of savin time, iha# comments..., 3} Evar�geiist is spelled r�rrong, 4) pag� �, fourih paragraph, fifith line from the bo#tom should read, u....of wh�ei chairs.i', and 5) pag� 14, �he first moiion should read 3 navs, nofi ayes and the second paragraph �hauld read, °M�tion/ econd:..." Mofion/Secor�d: �te�ensor�lMiller to �pprov� th� rninutes of September 4, 199fi, as �t�ended 1. Call ta� Order '. r 3. Approvai of Minutes: September 4 �nd September 1 �, 9 996 i i r �, � • � ' , _,: � : ,. _ �;. 'r w ; � � � �'. ' ' s #: � -�y� +�*. . �_ 5 aye� o r��y� �� f , + � .. � • .... • r -.: ,,, � �- - i � � . � � .� � .� � � . .� - �, � � . � , .: -: � . y `'. - ' • ! � � �. ' * ' ,' �J ey�S 0 Piajls T'h�re w�re no resident requ�sis or r�rnments from ih� floor. Communiiy Devefopmen� Direcior Sheldon explain�d the requ�s� from f�on�ld Gardner for a variance in the rear setbac�C. She explained that the norrnal requiremeni would be 30 fe�i and the reques€ i� tn aiiow the setback io be reduc�d to 10 feet fram the rear property line to �Ilov� the con�tr�action of a 4hree-season porch. She further exp(ained that the porch wouid be repfacing the exisiing d�ck thafi was in the same locaiion at 8480 Pleasant View Drive. Director She{don cor�tinued by saying 4hai Staff has fiaken the crit�ria for granting variances and noted where she f�lt the Commission cauld make appropriafe f ndings to approve this case which is S�a�f s recomm�ndatian. ihis informaiion was in the proposed resolution e� approvai whic� had been provided to the Commission. Director Sheldon summarized the main points from the resolu#ion as fofiows: ihe lot i� irreg�Iar in shap� because it is at the �nd of a cul-de-sac and �s a res�alt the hous� is p►ashed fur�her to ihe rear; ber,ause of ihe interior floor pian of t�e �ome and the �'act tha� there is an existing sliding glass daor �n ti�e second fioor, there does no� appear to be �ny other practical locatio� �or t�e three�se�son pc�rc�. SY�e �uriher explain�d thaf the house �n ihe 4 • ^ • '. . -. 4. Resident R�quesfs and C�mments from the �i�or '!:. R^`t, i� *,: - . - . .� . *. '-�� •: �: _ - '"-R s" -. . . . :�:� - � - �. . :. : •. �. ; i ��:• � , �: ` -, r. . . .. .,� _ �; � . .. � .. - ' .- neig�boring prop�r#y 4o the north i� o�-set to the oppos�te side of the lot so 4her� is r�o hou�e righ4 across the properiy line and ther� ar� trees that screer� this improvem�nt �rorr� fhe neighbor. Director Sheldor� informed #he Commissi�� that the applicanfs, iVlr. a�d Mrs. Ronald Gardner, were pres�nt. Ma#ion/Secon�: Si�ven�on/Mii�er to approve Resofution No. 4i�-96 approving a variance granting a red�ction in th� r�ar setbac� requirerner�fi from 30 feet to 10 fee� for can�#ruciion of a three-season porch at �4�0 Pl�asan� !lier� Drive, Planning �ase No. 457'-9�, as ar�nended. Gommissianer Miiler �vas concerr�ed about the - fifth paragraph being redu�dan� from the fo�rth �ut Directar Sheldon expiair�ed that ihe resolution follows the criteria outlined far varianc�s. I# dvas decided by the Commission fo leave the resolution as is. Chair Pe#erson recomme�ded that the title of the resolution be changed to include, "reso[ut�on approving a variance grantinp � reduction....n 5 ayes 0 nays Chair P�terson informed the app[icani that their case had nov� been approved and the ne� step woufd be to obtain a buiiding permit. Community Development �irector St��Idon addr�ssed ihe Comrreission explaining th�t this req�est is for a vari�nce i� t�e building setback req�airemer�t betw��n fvvo structures on the property loca#ed at 709� �rollwood �rive. ��e ftarth�r expiained that the stru�t�ares involved rn�er� a r�sidenc� and � d�fached g�rage and Niotion Carri�d . .: . - . . . •- . . . , • •* _ -a.� r .: - ._* - ' • : • . � � ,_ � . - ., ., . �� i t � � � ' :� �,,_ .: � /.'.:: . ,:. ,: 1r r .,.. * '."". :...... �.. � � ' ' ,. � ..��,��.� � " •�.-1 k � .i nafed that fhe required setbac� i� six feet �r�d the �pplicar�t is requesting three feet (#his has beert rounded off frorn th� 3'4" requested}. She con#inued by saying t�at the �pplic,�nt has �dded an enclosed �nfiry weay at fhe b�ck door which is exisfrng and t�e direction of the stainnray within the �nclosure is iov�✓ard� �he garage and because of ihose facfors, in me�ns that the str�cture does get cleaser ih�n �ix feet. tt v�ras St�if's fee(ir�g, �speciaiiy since ihe fi�o sirucfures d� noi �verlap and that � hardship �nrould b� incurred by having fo redesign th� house and move �he rear entrance, that �his variance was justif ed. It wa� �taff s recommendafion thai this requesi c.ould be approved. Director Sheldon �oted ihai a diagram had been provided to ihe Pl�nr�ing Commission. She continued by saying thag a resoiu�ion has been provided #o fihe Planning Commis�ion that ouflines th� findings and the facts thafi �pply fo those finding� and suggested ihat the tiiie be changed to include "..a variance r.c�antin�...". She noted �he conting�ncy contained in the resolution which is ihat priar to final inspection and �ppr�val of the b�ilding addition tha# the proper work is done on the vualls of �he garage to fireproof it �o meet buiiding code requiremer�is. Director S�etdon informed ti�e F'lan�ing Commission thaf �i�e appCicant, Scatt McCulioch from Vic & Son, was present. ihe following correcfions wer� noted in the rescal�ation: �) the first paragraph, third fine, s�o�ld re�d, "....to aflovv � red�actior�...", 2) t�e sev�nth paragraph, first line, shaufd read °.._th� granting of the variar�ce...�, 3) the sev�nih paragraph, ��cond line, should re�d, "...to awner� of other iar�ds...�, 4) ihe second page, third paragraph, second fine, sho�ald re�d, °...on behalfi of T�rry..." ar�d 5) 4he ��me par°agrap�, �-. ... �� ! .: - . � ' i,.f • _; � ; � � °. . � �: , �:. _ � �: ,. ... , . -. - . � *�r- `.. .,* third line should read, u....three feet beiv��en the corners of the princEpal...A Motion/Second: �rooks/Miiler to approv� Resoiuti�n No. 4�79-96 approving � variance granfiing a reduction in the setback requirement from six feet to three feef between fhe corners of principa6 building �nd art accessory garage buiEding to allo�tr the constr�cYion df ar� enclosed rear entrance for the residenc� �t i09Q ICr�ollwoc�c! Drive, Planni�g Case [Vo. 45�-96, as amended. 5 ayes 0 nays �ornr�issioner St�v�r�sor� addressed the appltcant and requested that ii be noted in th� min�fes that fhe appiicar�i h�d proceeded with c�nstrucfion and ihen requesied the variance _ - afier #he �act. Director Sheldon expiained fio fhe Plar�ning Commission that the nexi case w�as a request io cortstruct a concrete parki�g �rea within one foof of ihe side property 1ine. She contirtued by saying that �he City Code does allow for temporary p�rking ar�as wi#hin one foot of fhe side properiy line with permission from the adjac�nt neighbar but in this case the applicant is requesting a differer�t materiai which is nof defined as temporary and has b�er� unabie io get the permission fram af the adjacent proper�y o�rner. She �ntincaed by saying that the sta�f repart autlines ihe reasons why Staff is recommending deni�l of this r�quesfi. She remir�ded the Commission th�t t}�is case had been discussed at fength �t iheir I��t meetir�g. �he believed that the key iss�ae in this �se was th�i �he drigi�ai �Il�w�nce fnr p�rking Iois at �ne foo# was �dded to the Code with cert�ir� • • _ -. 7. Consider��ion of ResoEution �io. 482-96 Regarding the Variance Request of John R. Manning, 7755 Spring Lake Ro�d, Pl�nning Case No. 459-96 , � +��* � . �<' • � : � • . �. . i .. �;>� �: limitations �nd writh a specific requirement tha� the neighbor grant permission and thaf the properiy has sufficient room �o add area �or par6cing wi4hout having to use the �rea be�een five foot and one foot. She corttinued by s�yirtg fh�4 it is qu�stionable �ehether ther� is a hardship in this case and �her� are aiternaiive� available �o th� properfiy o�ner. A resolu�ion had been pr�p�red ihat denies the request and again suggested fhai the �itle be modi�ed to include, °...� reques� for a v�riance for a �oncrete...". Director Sheldon informed the Commission th�t fhe appiicanf, Nlr. John Manning, was pr�sent. She noied ��at she did talk to th� F'olice �epartmeni about wh�ther is was possibde #o ge� a special permifi for parking on 5pring Lake Road and the Chief said thai it is a possibility if there i� a speciat event �nrhere there are a number of guesi� ar�d that the pr�perty owner could as� fa� a special permit for parking on the s�reet and she also iearned that fhere �re plans to widen Spring Lake Road in 1998 and the width woulci make it easier to use ii for temporary parking. (�ommissione� �ras��mle arrived �t 7:30 p.m.} Commissioner Brooks asked the applicant why he could nat add �o ihe driverrvay in t�e other directior�. �tir. IVlanning explained th�t he is tryir�g to ciean up the property. TFtete ar� so rnany pine trees in the ar�a th�i he wo�id like t� add on to #he driv�way because if is difficult to grow gr�s� in fihaf area. �le also explained tha� he cannot park �n the str�et ever, day or r�ight. Chair Petersan inquir�d a� to t��w a parking permif is �bf�ined and wh�ther �r noQ it needs � _�:��-' � ••. ...`- . :; :; E .: : � !;s � r :,, „ ,- <. ;� �' . ` i �: _, � ,,.,- �� —. ". �. ,_��. � ... - 0 r-. �_ -! —4 �. . � :� � �. � .� r�� to be a"special ev�nin. DIfP.CtOP S�1eICjOP1 replied th�t h�r impression is �ha� i� would be evertts such as �n anniversary pariy, birihday party or an op�n S�au�e, etc. Chair P�ierson asked whether or not Mr. Manning is r�quired to expi�in fo the Police Department a reason for war�ting a parking p�rmit. Directvr Sh�ldon didn't think so, but �houghi #h�t ifi ii r�ou[d be a frequer�t request, the P�lic,e C�epariment may start to questaon it because fhe stree# is r�arrow in that area. Cnrr�missio�er �berfi briefly ialk�d about the parking resiricfior� bu4 noted that he does not see a i�ardship in �his case because he beli�ves ther� �re other �r�y to clean up the property and added #here are numerous kinds of plan� maieriai that will fhrive �nder fih�se shady conditians. Chair Peterson added fihat he ha� the same situation in this yard and ihat the pine needies works great as a mulch. The appiicar�t ihen brought up that fihe neighbo�s trees w�re hanging in his yard and was #F�ere anything that he couid do about it. Gi�air Petersa� ir�quired as �o whether or nc�t he had asked the neighbor to #rim them back. Nlr. Manning r�plied that the neighbor does not take care of that �nd of the prap�rty. Chair Petersor� informed �he appEicant thai if the �'lanning Commissior� denies #his request, it does nofi mean that he can�oi put a driveway in. Director Sheldon nofed that he r,an install a driveway withou# a variance up to five fee4 from ih� propert�r iine. The appli�ni was �ncern�d that if he ins4�lled gravel, that the neighbor couEd s�ill c�mplain ab��t it. Commissior�er Oberi replied that the Cods i� specifc irt stat�ng �hat �here i� � five fooi limit unfess he can ge� appEOVai from the neig�bor. Direcfior ��eldor� added fhat cor�crete �r grav�{ co�ld b� instafled, but �nly up io five feet from fihe �.`:: i .:� .;i:: ..:. ... . .-.:. . .... ; _ :: ::_ ._. ' .__: . . ..;;; . � �' :� � � '�i. . ��. • ! �::_ �. �. �' _ .. . . ` .... . . . .. .. � . • ..,, *� � a - � .. ,: � . • � y .. ' i i,� ! s t ^� �. �"i�-_ = � . .'.• t •s. � .-� . w ..� f...... : i ��.. � . .. . �, � ��,... Chair Peterso� again mentioned to the applir�nfi that #h�re ar� other alternafives to maintaining fihe shaded areas ofi his properfy. �/lir. h��rtr�irrg ir�formed the �omrni�si�n thaf the neighb�r's house is eighty feet away, th�y hav� af least 100 pine #re�s, and you can't hear or see him and that she didn't eve� �now who h� was when he went to the door #o get permission. Ruth White, �he adjoi�ing neighbor afi 2917 County Road I, addressed the Planning Commission artd indicated ihai she is fih� oniy one af�ecfed by iF�is request. 5i�e inforrn�d fihe C�mmission that Mr. Manning already has a big driveway and there are always numerous cars parked there and that he parks up against her fe�ce. She was not quite sure wha� f�e now has f�r a parking surface ihere. She indicated that her fence is nof on the property line and she believed he cauld even be parking on her property since he p�rks rigi�t up to the fence. She ir�dir,ated iF�at her property is a�ig vacar�i iot and that at some time this lot could be sold and someone else woufd be living fhere. She furih�r explair�ed that she objecfis and thinks the driveway should be five feet from the line. 5he agre�d that he does have a need for extended parking but thinks that gravel couid be �sed. �he would like �onsideratior� u�ed for the pe�ple in the future wP�o wifi be p�archasing th� f�t and buiiding � F�ome. Cor�tr�issioner �r��aernle confirmed a cor�rn�nt from Ms. 1n/hite regarding the use df gr�vel and �neondered if she wouid obj�c4 to i�avir�g it p�# to one �oo� fror� the properiy lin�. ; <.� ; . �`�� '_ ;�;" : � �, _ � r� � �, . �. � � . � �'�. � . ' � � - M. � �. - i � ° ' � ♦ � �. � -�:` a She repiied she doe� not objeci to grav�l, sh� just does nc�t want anything permanent su�h as concrete. Chair Pefierson Endicated that if the applicani i� willing �o drop his request for concrete he �ould get permission firom the adjacent praperfy ovuner to ir�stall gravef. Directo� Sheidon �vanted ta make sure that Ms. White understood ihat �he Gode allow� for gravel #a be placed �p to one fooi for parkir�g purpo�es with permission and asked her if that i� the permission she is wiiling to gran# the applic,ar�t. Ms. VVhite replied that yes, it is fh� permission, bu� weanted �o make sure tha� th� �pplicant �� avvare of �here fhe prope�y line is insialling the gravel and �dded fh�i �he fence is nat on her prop�rty iine but approximately six inches �rom the lir�e. Ghair Peterson asked if eiiher M�.1Nhite or Mr. i�lanning kn�w where the property line is. Both thought tha# the property Iine was six inche� in from Nls. White's fence. [1�r. Nlanning confirmed that without a variance anci with just a permit he could put gravel up to one foot from the property line. Director Sheldon again added, yes, with a letter of permission from Ms. Whiie. Commissioner Steve�son said that 4hey would be removing this i�em for consideratio� at thi� point since the appiicant is withdr�vving his reques�. f�s. Sheldon a# this time ask�d th� applicant i� he was wiihdrawing his requesi or if he woul� lik� the Commission to act on it. 14 was explair�ed thaf if the Pia�ning �ommission der�ied his r�quest he could appea! to fihe Ciiy Coun�il. f�r. M�rtning withdrew his request a�d wa� inf�rmed that his request for gr�vel up fio one foot frdm th� lo� lin�, vvith a letier �f pertnissior� from Ms. VVhiie, �n+ocalc! be har�dled P,pplicant Withdr�w R�quest � I .. .... , .,. . .... . . ,. . ._''� 1 '..' .. ;: .. : ,. ' :: .-�.-: .. .. _ _ � � � -" � ; � <..: * � � ��, _ '. ".� A �...- ,. ��#...._.. +.,.... � � • i r R :*��. �l.r. � �. �, � # �r� the office by the Communi#y Developm�n4 ��pariment. Chair Pet�rson informed fUis. �lVhite fihat this is �n infvrmal process and on�e this is established the parking �rea wiil stay on the property and that the new owner �� the property shouid be inf�rmed of this agreeme�t. hl� suggestied that the de#�ils of the letter be v�eorked out �s soon as possible so ihat t�lr. ivlanning could proceed v�ith �is building perrnit for ihe driveway. Commissioner Miller ask�d ii the Cify had a standard form that r.��id be used. NI�. Sh�idon repiied tha# we dv�'t rig�t nov�✓ but it is some#hing that could be �reafed. nir�cior Sheldort began #he discussion by expiaining this ordinance amendment r�ras started in �onjunction vvith the request for a c��rch dev�iopment at 3025 Coun#y Road H. The adjacent property �wner has praposed a Code amendmeni tha# would require ai least 15 between parking lots for churches and commercial u�es �hen those parking lofs are nexi to residenfiai properiy. S�e �xplained tha# when Sfi�ff began drafting #he ordinanc.e fo bri�g it befor� �he Pla�ning �ommi�sion, additional items were inclu�ed. �he reminded #ha# Commission tha� at their last meeting, the Commission asked if S�aff could prepare at least o�e versior� of the ordinanc� 4�at narrowed if back dovvn io the originad request and 4hen a versiar� that had fihe oih�r items sc� that if the Planning Commissior� felf that 4�e [o�ger ordir�ance needed more reviev+�, fh� Planning Commission vv�uld b� able io tak� the origi�al request and rnove ii fon�ard. She noted th�t the Ciiy afforn�y had decided the sixty-day rule which limits �he length of �im� � case can w�it fvr decisio�, applie� to 4his request. �i�e indi�i�d th�t she h�d notif ed ' � 4 a ' �� _, • . . -t `-� • • - `- • . ' � i �� - ..�� . }- . ,. . _ --.. _ _ � �,. � .- - � �;_: ' ' `` ! :' ,�: :, i � � �.. � -. r. _ � ! � ..T .., i� � � � �he [Vfoons, who are the applic�nt� in 4his case, that wiith a sixty-ciay exie�sion �f the rule, a decision i� �eeeied �rom the Planning Commission regardir�g their recommenda#ion either at this meeting or the r�ext meeting on October 9th so thai ihis iiern r.an get to City Counci� in �ime to still siay within �he 120 days time lirnit. Ms. �heldon suggested fihat they loolc �;t �he propo�ed ordinance page by page to point oui what is in the basic ordinance and what additior�a! things are ir� 4he Ionger ordinar�ce and if �he Planning Commission eould provide her v�rith feedback a� fhey go along. She comm�nted th�i if fhe Planr�ing Commis�ion feft comfartable, th�y could vote this evening or bring it back to ihe Plar�nirrg Commission at ihe October � rr�eeting. At this #ime the Director Sheldort and the Planning Commissic�n discussed exter�siveiy the proposed Ordinance Nc�. 590 reiafiing to setbacks for parking lois, driveways, and principal and accessory buiEding; minimurr� lot area for �on-residential uses lisied as condi#ionai use in r�sidentiai dis�rici; and confinued use of nonconfiorrning parking lots for non�residential conditional uses in residential districts. Director Shefdon st�ried off by indicating th�t i� aur current ordinance in �he section on setbac�s, �he char� shown in the proposed res�lution is aiso in our current ordinance, buf it is not ci�ar whethe� it appfies io just principle building� or aIl types of �uiidings and ir� lai�r s�ctions �f fihe Code, speci�c references are made 40 �ccessory buildings. Director Sh�ldar� explained thai in #he longer version of the resolution �he is �rying io d�fine what a princi�le building is �nd then �pply the �hark to prir�ciple building� and th� use th� sections t��i �: � �`' i� . _ � s: �'' , '�� i �� " • � � � " �. ._� � � �:�„ •.,� .T'_ < foilow tha� appiy io a�cessory struci�re� �nd parking lofs. � �� -� - . . -�,.,�_�_ . _. . ._ +...-.. - . . ..-.�._.-, - .« . _ -. - ,_ +- ...:�.. �, , �_ , �.. ._ .. �••.- � .� - - .. � 7"he sec4ion regarding parbcing are�s, wouid keep fhe current ordir�ance ailawar�ce f�� parking lat� at five �oo� away from th� property iine, except fior ternpor�ry, wrhich can ga v�iih��n one foot wifh p�rmission from the adjacer�i prope�iy owr��r wihen �he par6�ing areas are for residences. For rton-resid�nti�l �ses fhe proposed ordinance indi�te� that churches, day care centers, nursing homes, etc. can go �o five fieet excep# where 4he adj�c,eni property is zoned for r�sidential use. If tha# is the case, if the siie wifih #he non-residen#ia! us� is 2-1/2 acres or less it must be 2O feei, and if ii is more than 2-112 acres it musf be 3o feet. �arking areas in existenc� prior io the d�te of this ordinance can be considered r�on-conf�rming. She cc��iinued by addressing parking areas in business districis and indicafied ih�t fronf is 30 feet, side and rear is five fee� except where the iand on the other side of 4he line is in a resid�ntial district if will be 20 or 30 fieei as noted in fihe ci�arQ, Ms. Sheido� then addressed industri�i! districts, ar�d noted th�� the 40 fe�t requirerr�ent came from the ct�art and the 2Q-30 fee# came from the Nloons reque�t. Reminding the Commis�ion that ihe appli�n�'s re�u�sfi vvas 15 fi�et �nd the Planr�ing Comrnissi�r�'s w�s 20 to 3(} f�et. Nfs. S�eldon went o� io discuss r�quirem�nts �or !o# sizes. S�e indi�#ed that the propo�ed .; Mo�nds Vievv Pl�nr�ing Cort�missiort October 2, 199f Regular fVleefing Page 13 ordinan� i�cludes non-residentiai u��s in an R-1, R-2, R-3, R-� or R-5 District li�ted a� conditional uses such as nursing ��mes, churches, etc., except for go�ernmentai and pubiic utility buildings �nd sfructures needed for pub{ic healih, safety a�d vvelfare, �+hich shall be a min�rr�urra of one acre and she noted tha# this was not C2an Moon's reque�t, but was her sugg�s4icsn and rer�inded the Pl�nning Commission ihai they felt they sho�ld leave it in. Th� lasi sec4�on thaf was discussed w�s n�n-conforming cvntinuance of �ase vahich say� thai ifi yvu have a p�ar�ing lai ih�t d�es nnt r�ow meet fh� s�tba�k�, you can keep usir�g ii, restripe or resurface,� �tc. (which does in�C�de grindirrg it up a�d re[aying it) and keep it ihe �ame si�e. At #his time the Pi�nr�ing Commissinn thanked ' � Ms. Sheldon for taking the time to clarify some o# the confusirtg sections of the Code �r�d bringing fih�m to the Planning Commission for discussion. [�irecior Sheldon v�en# on to discuss #he it@m regarding the liaison relationship to Ciiy �ouncil and requested the Planning Comrni�sion's feelings regarding thi� issue. It was the consensus o� th� Planning C�mrr�ission �hat a member of the City Gouncil should be present at all Planning Co�nmission meetings to report on the activiiy of #he Gommission because they feel the Commission goes into more depth and detail and th�fi the Counci[ should be apprised af those detaifs and "digging work" that is involved. ii�e Commission alsa felt th�t if there are fiaisons, there shouid b� fair treatment �f tk�e Commissions. Commi�sioner Si�ven�orr r�oied th�t he has beerr o� th� Parks a�d R�cre�fiio� Gornmission f�r almost ten years and ��ou�ci! . ' � �. . I S � � • � �":� . � � � ' . !R � � ' . � -� - �: * � '� �. �` * �:�- •«� ._!_ , member liaisor� h�s b��n preser�t at �Imosi every meeting. �hey further discussed which meeting woutd b� r�ore crucial for #he council liaison to attend, the agenda or reg�tar meetir�g. ihe Planning �ommission fieli thafi the iiems are discu�sed irt more detail �fi fhe agenda meeting and no minutes are taken at thi� meeting. Direc�or Sh�ldar� inforrr�ed the Commisgion ih�t she had � di�cussion wiih Attor�ey �ob L�ng r�garding a memb�r ofi the Pl�nr�ing Commission reporiir�g to Councii or� the kind business ihaf the Planning Commission does. She �ees a problem in cases gc�ing on fo t�e Co�ncii for decision and of having a separaf� report outside �f the pubiic he�ring o� cas�s they �r� gang to be decidir�g. She f�lf fhe Planning Commission's work is different from the other Commissions noiir�g that ihere is a definite procedure fhat takes it from ihe Planning Commissio� to the Council and that there are h�aring provisions fo proiec# the neighbors and property owners. She added ihaf Attor��y Long fihought that it vvas a point that needed io b� clarified v�rith the C�uncil. Commissioner Brooks broughi �p a comment aboui fhe City Council receiving minuies and it was e�ofied that ihe City C�uncil does receive a copy of the approved Planning Comrnissior� mint�ie�. Commissioner Obert comme�ied that he felt the v�ork done by the Pl�nr�ing Commig�ion is the "fabri�" of t�e City and that fhey also lay fhe ground wark fior the Ci#y and i� very coneerr�ed th�� Ca�ncil member doe� r�ot come io fih� meeting� be�use not �Il t�ings that go or� �t ihe P(a�7�ing Comrr�i��ion can be r�e,�rded o� paper. � _; `�. •- ' • • •' � - . - - �° , �, � • ;• � ,;'° �: i �.- "� „.!_ " Cocnmi�sion�r �rasaemle felt thafi if � �our�cil member is noi vvili�ng to r,ome to both the agenda and regular r�reetings, h� believes ih�t it should be fihe agenda sessiort that ihey atfend. C.hair i'eterson.commenfed tha� on more than one occasion when �e atiended City Couneil meetings, the Councii liaison or sfaffi member as w�ll a� himseif had to defend �he a�4ion� ef the Plsr�ning Commission against the mi�represenf�tion� of the appigcant so he believes the invoivement of the Cour�cil li�ison is very important. Director Sh�ldon added thafi per�aps as a supplernent to the Courtcif liaison, a mernber of th� Planning Comrnission, on a rotating basis, could go #o t�e Councii meeting w�er� ca�e� are being discussed t� cc�mrnerrt or� the key issues and concerns v� the Planning Cammissi�n. lt was the consensu� of the planning Commission that a member of the Commissio� afitend tho�e meetings where their iterns are being discussed. Ai fihis tien� PVIs. Sheidon reviewed a memo tha4 she drafted regarding the desire for closer communi�ations between fihe Council and other C�mmissions. ihis concern was expressed by the Chairman af the Economic Development Commissiort at the September 30�h City Cou�cil wor� session. It �eas suggested fihai the Pianni�g C�mt°�ission receive minutes from each of the other Commissions �nd ii wras agreed th�fi 4hey �n+ould tr�r ihis to see if i� is helpful. _ ... � s �- . - � -� . -�: � .. . � . �- - � � ,� ., � �� , � � � � � .:� � _ : , � � � --. ,_. ,.. .. :, , �: � . � #. � ..- ..., � .f=- �, goals and objeciiv�s ae�d ��at perhaps ihe meeting wiiF� ihe Plan�ing Commission and City Councii couid be combined witit the EDC because of the �veriappi�g �rea� of int�rest. , _ . y. . . �. � . . . R . ; + • _ a: � ! ' ^ • •� � � • _ _ y � y �- - . • � a •' � _s'°-� � a � .° i �, �� :l. _ �_ � _�, ,.��-�',. • {. �ir�ctor Sheldor� indi�ated th�t she v�ou)d write up these r.omments for �lanning C�mrni�sion review at ih� next meefing, and if acc�ptable fo the Commissian it wo�ld be sent or� t� the Ciiy Council. (Commisslorr�r �rook� let� at 9: 30 p. m-) At this tim�, Dir�cior Sheldon, infroduced our new Pl�nning Associate, Jim Erir�on, and indicat�d ihat he will certainly p{ay a big par4 in warking on �ases and coming before �he Pfianning Commission ar�d she noted ihai she had given each Commission member � e,�py of his resume. Cc�mmissior�er Milier expressed her ccancern with vvhat was going on v�+ith 4he grey building behir�d Fina and a large semi-typ� trailer that was parked nexfi fio it. Director Sheldon indicated thaf she wrould check into the situatiort. At this tirne Director Sheldon distribufed a �ll�7IIC��IOi! �i1�ltled, "i��8B1i11�1� �Oft1C111SSE0�1 Journal", .and indicaied th� department has g�t4en a one-year sub�cripti�n for the Planni�g Commissian to �ry. � -� .-� . - = . � � _� _,,�._ - � ,� _ _ * � � . _ � . .. .: ��,� t_ .:, �-� •-- � �__ .�' _.i-� �- -,. _�., `�-.�� _ Mounds !/iew Plann�rtg Commis�ion {��i�ber 2, � 99� Regular Nte�ting Page 1 � , , . _ . , - - � : a• : - - - •�-_ _ s ._.i �_ ihe pSar�ning Commissior� �t this 4ime als� expressed their concer� with th� limited cover�ge o� the Ciiy of f�ounds View in bofih the Focu� and the New Brightvn �ulletin. , . - _ _ ,. , -. . -�� f�, � i: � � . !:^� �'-•�^� �'.�-:� ..�, = .' _. „_. ...� . �. : ..,...• ^ �"4 ' - _. . � � . " -. • ": +�, � � .�. ... � � . - � . +: s :,.. �_ ..._. � • �. ,. • . .. R • .. , � �. ,.. � . , � - � __ � a ,_. "�• ��, � �• ihere be'rrrg no further business b�for� the 11. Adjour�m�nt Planni�g Comm�ss�ort, Cnair P�t�r�on , adjourned the meefing at 9:47 p.m. R�spectfuify submitted, Pamela Sheldo� Corinmuniiy C�edelopment �irector I I .. . ._ . _ . ... - --._ .. . . ,.. ... : � ��N�� co��i /� �o� ��j-��n�� -- --_ _ _ ---_ -- -- _ _ �_ __ ----_ .---- ---._ .__ .---�-- -- ��c�, �, r�� . � ��-,�,i w► _ _ _ _. _ N�� l�-p��L-�5� _ � __ __ ��A� v �A��,�€� �y�a P�,�AS�,��- u�,�� v�-- - �'1 ��,�ds .VJ�--� _ �ti�r�- -��a�ne��. E `° .., __ °�o�n _��n�n �TS�g.�_s ' 1 �,{ / � l / �lV � � � .1l !G �a 1_�--/�C( '_�--._.__.._ �vf�KltG�S �'<<�Gll_.__��i.. . __ j9 f�� l010�9 A%Ji �i�c� CJ�'�c�� e.r'rtz.l�z, �''vlaa � � � � _ -- - ' _r _ . _ .. /_, _ 1� Pzcs:al�N� SC'd / 7� � l ��/�'/� lf, c_ � s� ,� �e.�.s� / O ��O � D/ �/� .�� /�l� � �d:�/ ,� cl.r O'`%N �l J . ��.�''/_��, � 9�7 � : �z�� j,-� j/, _ � - - - - - - - - Item ��5 -, �; '! '�: • : ,. ''�° 1 ' f " 1' `',.. �/Ieeting D�ieo Staf�F�tepart byo I'lanning Case Fiie N000 IBequesie December 4, 1996 7ames Ericson, F'lanning �%,ssociate ... �. The applica�t is requesiing a minoc subdivision to move 12.5 feet from 7532 5ilver Lake Road to 7540 Silver Lake Road. �eii�io�era Larry Beach, on behalf of Richard Edin (7532 Silver Lake Road) and Wiliiam Culber� (7540 S►iver Lake Itoad). i�ocationo " '1',; `'- v; Z�ning/Laa�d jJs�: 7532 and 7540 Silver Lake iZoad 753� Silver Lak� Raad: Per�ding � 7540 Silver Lake Road: 07-30-23-21-0069 The properties a.re currently zoned R-2, Singie and '�wo-Family Residential and are �mproved with two twin-homes. Total acreage oi e�stin� property is 46,93 5 square feet (1.Q8 acres.} ,Appiicab[e Iteguiataons: Section 1201.03, Subd. 11, defines a minor subdivision as "A subdivision of a parcel or parcels or property less than two acres in size in which na more than one additionat parc�l or lot is created. Section 1202.01, Subd. 1, states "Minor subdivision requests shall require at Ieast a surveyor's certificate for approvai." Section 1104.02, Subd. 2, requires a minimum lot width for R-21ots of 100 feet. �eciion 1104.02, Subd. 3, requires a minimum lot size of 12,500 square feet for R-Z lo#s. Section 1204.02, Subd. 6, requires an additional park dedicafion fee for re-subdivided parcels. This applies only when park dedication fees ttave not already been paid for the property or if the gross density per acre increases as a resuit of the re-subdivision. Park dedication fees have been paid for the property ta the north, but no fees have been collected for the subdivision to the south. Att�cl�me�ts: Planning t�pplication Zoning Map Cei-�ificate of Survey (reduction) Certificaie of 5urvey (full size enclosed with packet) Utility and I�rainage Easements � Resolufiion No. 48�-96 , _ PLANNING C,o►SE NO. 466-96 November 27, 1996 Page 2 �ack��°o�r�do This minor subdivision does not create an additional lai but insfiead takes a 12 %z foot wide strip of land from one lot and adds it to the adjoining Iot to the north. This action would £ormaiize a previous agreement made with the property owner to the north and Iv1r, Beach. The property owner io the south was inform�d of this icnpending action prior to the purchase of'7532 Siiver Lake Road. The applicant has provided a new ten-foot wide drainage and utility easement centering on and corresponding to the new property line. (�ee the attached easements.) A�a�[ys�so - ,� The mirumum square footage for lat area required by the Code is 12,500 feet, The properties currently well exceed that requirement with 20,853 square feet for the property io the north and �b,075 square feei for the property to the south: After the re-subdivision, the properties will remain in compliance with this requiremeni with 23,460 square feet for the property to the north and 23,468 squaxe feet for ihe property to the south. Currently, the properties meet or exceed the minimum lot width requirement (100 feet for the northerly propertcy and I25 feet for the southerly property,) After the re-subdivision, the width of the properiies will be 112, 5 feet for both. ` The applicant has provided a revised Certificaie of �urvey �or the properties Iocated at J 7540 and 7532 Silver Lake Road. This revised Certificaie of Survey shows the properiy lines and easements as revised with the former property Iines atad easements in the background. The revised iots have been labeled as Parcel X(7540 Silver Lake Road) and Parcel Y(7532 Silver Lake Road.} The Certificate of Survey includes the revised tegai descriptions for both parcels, as well as their former descriptians. �fati It�c�en�endatioaao Adoption of attached resolution recommending approval of this minor subdivision. i �� i �� E �� r �. ,- - � ,r .. . : �. �; �, . � : :. � , �; = <�: f> :� ,��:,. �;; ...��..;�� : ��. �� . -: �� ►�� : . �_ �_ < � ��. �i`�� ; �, ;►�: r � : .. � � �•� :� � : � i�, ;� _�� . , s �r � �. , � � -�. . f� •�.. , ;. . ; . . . . �. ► . �, ., ; . . � . � ; �__ ��: .- � . E ,, . , : �� ; -� .: jl' i; ; �; . � • �'�. : .- � �,�� `�� a� WI-iE�ZEAS, Mr. Larry Beach, represen�ing property owners of 7532 and 7540 Silver Lake Road {Loi Y and Lot X, respectivety), has requested approval of a minor subdivision that will remove the north 1.2.5 feet from Lot Y and combine same 12.5 feet witYt Lot X; and WHEREAS, the legal description oi 7532 Silver Lake Road is currently (pcior io the proposed.subdivision) as follows: Ti3E NORTH 75 �EET OF LOTS 10 AND 11, SPRIlVG LAKE PAR� � KNOI.,LS, R.AMSEY COUNTY, I�IlI�]NESOTA. SUBJECT TO DRAINAGE AND UTIL�TY EASEMEI�ITS OVER THE NORTH 5 FEET, EA,ST 10 �EET, AND WEST 38 FEET THERE4F. WHERLAS, the legal description oi7540 Silver Lake Road is currently (prior to the proposed subdivision) as follows: ALL 'iHAT PART OF LOT 3, BLOCK 1, Dt�II..Y KNOLLS, R.AMSEY COUNTY, MINNES�TA, LYING SOUTH O� THE NORTH 50 FEET THEREOF. SUBJECT TO DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS OVER THE WEST 30 FEET AND THE SOUTH 5 FEET THEREOIF. WHEREAS, notarized letters of agreemenY have been signed by affected properry owners of 7532 and 7540 Silver Lake Road; and WHEREAS, City sta.ff has reviewed the applicani's request for a minor subdivision and determined thai it is in conformance with Chapters i 201, 1202, 1104 and 1204 of the mtanicipal Code; and V+IHEREAS, the applicant has submitted a revised certificate o£survey for the two properties; and WHEREAS, the applicant has provided the City wzth revised utiiiiy and drainage easement documents %r 7532 and �540 �iiver Lake Road. i ;_:..; ` -1 ;.: ."- . ..:U: ;�::;. ,..`: . :;::,: .:': � - - ..""c"'. . �-.�._ . .. .. ��:.. .. . �i' .�� _: :, :�., . .,_ ... . , . . . ... . �,:. . .::. ,; � :;; " ` :;_: . . ' ' : Planning Commission Resotution No. 4�8-96 December 4, 1996 Page 2 IVO�A7, TkIEREFQRE, BE Ii' RESOL�TEI� that the Ie�ionnds View Planning Commissian recommends approval ofthe minor s�abdivision request frotn Larry Beach, representing the property ow►�ers of 7�32 and 7540 Silvee Lake Road, with the following conditions: The applican� shall submit the appropriate title abstracts and the signed, revised easements .prior ta the City Council's action on this item. 2. The applicant shali provide the City wiih a park dedication fee in the amount af $100 per Code requiremenYs in Section 1204.02. 3. The applicax7t shalf provide the City with notarized lettees of permissioez from William Culbert and Richard Edin, owners of 7532 an� 7540 Silver Lake Road, respectively. . 4. The applicant shall record the �nal resotution, revised Certiii�ate of Survey, and revised drainage and utility easement documents with Ramsey County within sixty --� <u t) {30) days of final adoption, and present proof of such recording to the City of Mounds View, or this approval shall be nutl and void. 5. The applicant shali include the foilowing restrictions in the deeds of the two parceis and as part of the easements: a. If one dweiling unit is burned or destroyed, it shall be reconstructed in a ;:<'<`� uniform appearance. _: h. If both dwelling units are burned or destroyEd, minimum lot widths shall then prevaii as for single family homes. c. A double dwelling unit may be rebuil� meeting the original conditions of this code. d. A uniform exierior appearance, in terms of cotor, design and maintenance, shall he maintained. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission directs staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the mznutes. Adopted this 4th day of December, 1996. Jerry Peterson, Chairman ATTEST; Pamela �heldon, Comcnunity Development Director (�EAL) n:\dataluserslj ime\shace\beach.reso �'` t �:` ` �� ::� � � =:.= _- �.: - ��; � � �i � � AP�L]�ANT: 6°�R�-� � ��.�► F'hane � �O °° S�o� ' AD��iE�S: � � _ .._ . •.." _� � +. . . .. - [rrt�rest it� Pro�erty (c�ec� appro�ri�4� box): ❑ Qudner of f'�operty Q COi7tidCt fOP �2�i$ �WT18C ❑ Less�e, Operaioc, Managee ❑ Agreemeret ia Ptarc.°�as� � Q Othec (explain) �ocumerttaty evid�rx:� af e�ptir.�r�t's ir�t��t in 4Pt� pe�srty m�y b� required baras� finel C::y a�n at ttti� reques� ��F. � � *� .� _ -` - .: + �'�� _ � r . , � : � l��gai D�sv;ipt�on or Prcperty ldentincatic�r� Pd�mb�r �ng�t ��n��: Name/A�dr�ss �ic� �d.►►J 5 �" ver �,��, �,:�1 1��1�,�r �l5'�f� �:1�� 1�,�� P°esent Use ��f�e��C apprap�iat� �ax): Q Ur�deveia��d/Vac�eit � Singie Family Dwelling ; � DuplexlTw� Family �weiling ' [,l Multi-�arnii}� (No. of Unli.s -- - - � . . _ . Q �usiness/Ca�mercaa! Esr�lisa�menC Q fndus'�a! Es'ablisi�meni ❑ Othe� (�l�inj Property C�ssmcaYaan. �,�•�UEjT: , . �� . _ � �s� � °o4ease naee; .4poiicani may be reseansible ror a��itiaria# `e�.s assac;ateci vmii� �e review or this r�uesL I I-fE�E3Y QE�:r'�E TH�T �E ASOV� S a'� r�c.�1�1 i Ai t� i rtUE. F4eaoniesg Vananc� Gxrai�ansi Us� Permit C.�� P� 7�v�iara 'Sit� r�!art Fi�vi�a , irror Su�sivision , m�sian .^,.°.aRO. P1an �rrtscrdre�ertt Wetlsna ,�{t�rffiion P9amrt 'Nedana "aurfer r'�rmi# �annmg Sign P'J � r RJD .�rtt�tdm��Y S4C8Js�re. minimum S2@0. ;na�dmum Si.C�O F�-t � r�2 - 5a 5. .�E atfz�ats 5690 Fi-i � r�-2 • S� 5. �l ad�o�s �00 Si5 ;1bOla�t�. �inimum 1�O.:r�as�mum S:iA St:O S`� pius S2°Q deaasit S�CO S50 oita� deocs�i d��rmin�a vy Stffif S10 S5c7 S��A 315C1 Psric �und fleaie�an 1=ee �� r�9sd i�adat Altam�r Tair! �ees �sid Oat� Paid Y�eZ�itiY AiUR9L�f AdditicnaJ r-s� r��id Car� �s'sd ��iac Numuer 1 -p• a o / ' .� 3 � � Oa� af fir�s! �'..or� >+P�9Crl��J �i 0�.�{IE� � , i�61� °„� r ,a .. i � m � .. �. _ .. �l.010 '� �.1.� . . . _ ., ,�il �° � � E � � m ia .a..,. iy�g � �swy ia54 /999 .. � N � a°o� c+ � 79J4 7933 7550 7940 7945 7846 79: , �� 79,32 7910 7935 7830 79 4 ,� ^ m �. � � u7 t at �tf �n rn �. 7897 "i �7g3 P �a e�a N N%900 7901 7300 n � N 790Q 790 7�9 � NlILVlEYd 7&JS 7890 7897 7Q� ,,�� y m 7820 76Z9 788p 7879 7 7861 e�v �.^�/� N 78B p'891 N N 788 789; 78T J 7813 7$70 7865 '�' ^' �3 -° W�N — - - � 8 860 7851 o -- a o n n 785Q � 7841 � � . ..... - --° 78.3 7829 779t —� 778i r:r.:::::::� :; _ - - - - 7785 ., yv i �wa 7�768 7767 +:�::"'�:::'�`c':"'.-:{';`.:�..;;(�-.-:.:�....'.,.r. 773 773 T729 ::.�i:;:;e::;;��`�-;��_ - - =::;;:: rss �z 3 � �a nas ..._.4.t!•..::�:li:=.:::•.'• .....:: :•.:, :...��....,:.�..... �• • '::'� • -�'. ol ^ �t J %%i %%� 7%iag �=��:��;:��:�::�;��:::�;��':,,.. � - e- �:.:::.::_.� :•.. _ n° Tt,o Z 77 �`.�R�:._..: _ 7710 7711 _ = - � � 7688 7 'a 769 7� ... ...... ......... � N v�a m < 767 N 76eo a 7sss 7s7o 7sb3 ,.py �.�j n 76H � 7870 7fifi3 7680 7655 766fi 7ff$y 78q.q 7� 763 763� 7664 7629 7634 762 '� 7829 7620 78� 762q 7�� 7627 7500 7fit9 7�Q 760t 'sa 7383 7554 759 7�1 7g 7575 7579 7588 738 7565 O 7565 798 Q 75 7ss o 7546 7�g � 7'� 7572 � 7545 75S `�p 7545 7560 � 555 ��B Y 754 Y 7575 �� n .- � ^ � „�i rai ,.°�� 750 � N 7500 c�.e c�i N N 5 20NSON DRNE � N � �D � o a o 7474 7489 � a� 744p 7485 � ^ � rn n n 7485 7474 747t 747 4� W 7�2 {5* BR�NS01 7448 7� 7452 743t 7456 � � N (�{ 7430 7433 7434 � 7415 � 740 7405 p 7409 741i z �� a�o Q 7�a� ,�sa 7ass � �asa 735� 7sea 7�s 7347 3 73i3 a .i2 3 � � �n n v� � 33 n u� r� m 325 � c.�i N Q O M N .-' O O 3I% � ✓1 M i°T N N N N N 3 � S O I O I I p I rn� I rn�� Po N � � 4 � � 7aoa ^I /J � � 73 N N t �p � h N N � n �: . ... ' ., .,, . _ � - , .� I � r ' ,, 1. �, .�. � L� � , yl . •.. � �.'. � :� � a. � �'. `� i ... �. %%�rJa �^`1 r� `Y� .o � .:' . !: . �.- Sf LVER Vf �1N PARK � 62 v ^ n n Vt£Nm o o r � � � � � . m r n � � r r � ti %.� � 5278 527 � �, 8-3 b N r �°�°� �� 78S` 785' 784' ] � ) ° 78i i � 78pf �ao� ns; �-re- �S: 774; T11; � , h�-� a N Y9 f� ^mN � nq � N �. , �s N � � � Pf � `° ..° � � �N �r�jaw m m � . 1.«n mom cV N N� CY � � O C ��N a' n O .. M ; � ly O N N� N � N w o o� d�p� m �„ey N � � �a N 0� m �� o� N � � fV N � N..,,v� �� : � P N �N O n � � N �� 'o N p . ... . ._.. _- -- - - ---- , - - ! � ' For.• LARRY BEACH 6951 Knollwaod D� ri9ounds Vew, MN 55112 Tele.• 780-5608 O 0 h � � � � � �� _ I ��' ___Y�-��--'___ � _ _ — � .e� �. �� i`� l / � 1 ' � _� �' � deck � � j � , , r i � �y r/c I � `----" i / J 4.z 30 ' F-------� i i i ' ,J i i � � 208. f 9 ' Townhouse ; Gar. � i i i e i � ``,``��°South line of the � JO � N 50 ft. of Lot 3 ; C t , � Sauth IIline of Lot 3, ; deek � o OAILE`A KNOLLS �----1 � � .. �� th line of Lot 1t ---`='�"` �' ��°' T �, � 208.6 i � ; Gar. ' - � � `= 7540 � ` �__""'J �q �Ip p J O Ll �P11rdY�� /� �i Q @� �1 � � � ... ... �Lf f;i ',�' �� 93.032 sq. j`C. w� � ___ _ asements to be vacaQed SEE ETAlL � --Q1------�� 1 _ .��- . � _ �= f ` " - �.,,� �� —=" � r. �,� • .. �� tTcrt ine of lot 10 � ' _'�,SPftING E PARK KidOLLS � r ^� REVISED DIVIStON �iNE--'� N� � ` � ��-South iine ot the N 12.5 ft. of�Lots t0 and�i � 1 ; _�__Te� e..e�ee.'_°_ _T\1 �I 'n � J8 I / �J�G � deck � y�i � i —� I � I i F..'�'___1 C `�, t / � ��9 �� I P� ! �o r.� � 15,645 sq. J� ' � Gar. ; o � � � � i 20B.6 � I i Townhousej ; � I i -r 'r � � , . � Gar. r � �� ( � 7530 i ; �------- J I I � � i r i �A ` 38 ' ' � o � dsck; ' � I i� �j — � — — � � ..—.�..- _ ---� -� .�.._ c _ �— �r' � — � — m 3 r �I � ° ! _ �v � '^� � N � � I � � �N O v W I �� t �� n � , � � 1 � , �` I i� � �� - • "�':`� � : 'li.7 t...:. ., DETAIL No scale //o \ 0 �° 00� \ � 208.53 �� i .6 � ti �\ n J 7540.• A/! thot part of Lot .J, Bloek 9, OAJLEY KNOCLS Ramsey County, A�/innesoto, lyrng south of the north SO feai thereof. Subpct to drainoge ond uti/ity easements atier the west JO feet and the south 5 fect fheieof 7532.• 71�e north 75 feet of Lots �O anC ll, SPRlNC LAKE PARK KNBLLS, Ramsey Counfy, Minnosota. Sub/o�ct to Brainage and utility aasem�rrts ove� fhe north 5 feat, eost JO feef and west 38 fret thereof. Rf"Y1 PROP R7Y DESCR/PT/ONS PARCEL_X A// thot part of Lot .�� B/ock 1, DA/LEY KNOLLS. Ramsey County, Alinnesoto. lying south o! the norPh 50 feet thereof, together with the narth 12.5 faet of Lots l0 and 11, 5FR/NG LAKE' PARK KNOLCS, Ramsey Caunty, ,49innesoto. PARCE.0 Y.• 7He south 62.5 feet of the north 7S feet aP Cofs 10 and 1J. SPR/NG LAKE PARK XNOLLS, Ramsey Counfy, M/nnesota. Revised 11/94/96 (eosements updated) Sco/e: 1'"= .�D' Orown Bs� �KB 600K / he�eby certify that this p/an, su�vey or �eport was prepored by me o� under my direcP supervlsion orrd thot 1 om a duly Reqistered Lond Surveyo� unde� th� lows of the St ' ne ta. Oated this /4�day of ev )g 9G. � License No. 9�� UlSK: �° j ✓VU �vV. y��y�� bm+�.�� , i�ic. L�ett� $LI�YfYO�� 918� �fJCa'P�l .�v�. WQ. CIR� F'IRl�, {�I T.� 5��1�-3�i. r�.. i8�-66�6 �AX �e�n��i � � tJTiL��Y �.FdD ID�Fi�F�AGE E�S NT �t�i�E Pi� TF32S EASEMENT AGREEI�9E1�1T made this da�r o� , 1996� by and be�ween William �o Culbert and Joanne Co Culbert, husband and wife (hereinatter �°eferred to as "Grantors °) and the Cz.�y of Mounds Vzew, a Minneso�a xnuraicipal corpora�ion, (hereina�ter refer�ed to as 'rC��y�� ) ; WHEREAS, Grantors are the fee owners of land located in Ramse� Caunty, Minnesata arto�e �ully des�ribed �n Exh.i.bit "A'° attached he�eto and made a part hereof and said �,and h.ereir�aiter refe�red to as the '°Prope�ty"o and WHE�tEAS, Grant4rs have requested the City� agprove a Iot divisi.on for the Property; and WHEREAS, the City has agreed to approve �he lot divisian upvn the condition that Gran,tors grant to �he City ce�tain utility and draznage easea�ents affecting the Property; and WHEREAS, Grantors anci �he City wish to enter i,nto an agreement �ahich will grant to the Ca.ty a utili�y and drainag� easement over a partion of the Proper�y as more fully de�cribed in Exhibit "B'° attaehed he�eto and made a part hereo�, hereinafter raferred �o as the "Easemen� Axea"; NOW THEREFORE, FOR VAGUABLE CONSZDERATION, the receipt and adequacy of �rhich is hereby acknor,vledged, and in consideration of the premises conta.ined he�ein, it is agreed b�r �he parties as follows: la Grantors h��eby convey to the Ci.ty and its successors and assigr�s an utility anci d�ainage easement ir�, under, on and over the ease�ent area, arzd the City he�eby accepts such conveyance. I 2o The following tex°ms a�d condition�.sha�� apply to the easement areae a_ No buildi�g or �anmade str�ctu�e af any �ind shail �e plac�d within the easem�nt area wzthout the prior writte� conse�t of the Cit�e b. No trash, waste or other offensive material shall be plaeed upo� or within the easement.area without the pria� writ�en consent of the Cityo c� The duration af the easement granted herein is perpetuale 3a Granto�s� their successors, heirs and assign� agree to maintain the easement a�ea subject to the provisions stated hereina 4o This ease�ent sha�I bind and inure to the benefit e� the parties, their successo�s and assigns. 5m No�hing contained herein shall impair any right of the Ci�� now h�ld, ar h�reinafter acquired to construct or mai�tain publie utilities in or on the easement areao �N WIT�ESS W�EREOFy the parties to this aqreement have caused these presents to be executed as of the date and year afo�esaid a E � William Ee Culbert J'oanne Co Culbe�� CITY OE" MOUI�DS VIEW By its ry STATE OF Mr1�11VESOTA ) ) ss. COUN'I'Y OF ) � Th� forego�ng iras�rument was aclsnowledged before me this day of , 1996, by William Ea CulI�er� and Joanne Ce Culbert, hu��and and witeo Notary Public , STAT� O�' MiNNESOTA ) ) sso COUNTY OF � � Th� foregoing irastrument �as acknow�edged befor� me th�s day �� , 1996 � ��r � the o£ the Cit� o� Maunds View, a a�unicipal corpora��on, on behal.f df said corparation, This instr�axnent was drafted by a Peterson, Fram & Bergman (SHB} 50 Ea.st Fi�th Street Sui.te 300 Sto Patal, MN 551fl1 i3a37.s6000g SHB\MISC\CULBERT.EA2 3 Notary Public � I� " �� . �._� 1 � �� ; All that part of Lot 3, Block T� Dailey .I{nolls, Ramsey Cotxxaty> Ma.nz�esota, lying So�xth of the North 5a feet iherec�f, tc�gethe� witii the No�th l� . 5 £eet of I,o�s 10 and ].1, Sp�i�rzg �,ake Par]e Knolls, Ramsey County, Ma.nneso�ao 4 , ,.. , , ; - -:: , ; . i� r. �AS N� �1 The South 5��et of �he 1Vor�h I2e5 feet of Lot 11 excepi, �he W�s� 30 ieet thereo� and the �outh 5 feet of the No�th 12e5 feet o� Lot 10, all a.aa Spring �alee Pa�k Kno�Zs, Ramsey Caun�y� M�r�a�eso��o 0 ; ; -- --- ,• . ; , .. _ -- .. _ ... --- - , �.: .��,� .�.�-r; ��-•-:;� _ , a :;�:� :. :�...,,�._ �F�IS EASEMENT �iGRE��NT made this da� of , 1996, by and between La�ry �o Bea�h and �heil.ey B. Beach, husband and wife (hereina.fter re�erred to as "Grantozs"j and the City of Mounds Va.ew, a Mi�.nesota municipal corparation, (hereinafter re�erred to as "Giicy")� WHEREAS, Grantors are �.he fee ewn,ers of land lacated in Ramse� County, I�iinnesc��a more f�ally des�ribed in E�hi�i� "A'° attached he�eto an.d macie a part hereof and saa,d �.and he.�einafter refe�red to as the '°Property'°; and WHEREAS, Grantors ha�r� reques�ecl �he Cit� ap�x�o�re a 1ot div�sion :Eor the Property; and W�EREI�S, �he City has agre�d �o approve the lot division upon the conditian tha� Gac°az�tors grant to �he City� certain uti.Zity and drain.age easements affecting the Prope�ty; an.d W�EREAS, Granto�s and the City raish to enter �nto an agreement whi.ch will grant �a the City a ut�.la.ty and drainage easement over a portion of the Progerty as more fully described in Exhibit '°B" attached hereto and mad� a pa�t he�e�f, hereinafter raferrad to as the "Easeanent Ax°ea'° � NOW T�iEREFORE, FOR VALUABLE CON�IDERATIOIV, the receipt anci adequacy o� whi.ch is hereby acknowledged, and in �onsideration of the premises �ontained herein, i.t is �greed by the parties as followso 1 a Grar�to�s he.reb�r convey to �he City and its success�rs and assigns aa� rxt�I�i,ty anci d�ainage easemer�t i��, uncier, - on and ove� the easemen� area, and the City he�ek�y a��ep�s such conveyancea 1 f Z` The fe1.l�wing terms and condi.tions shal.l apply to the easement areae ae No building or �anmade struc�ure of any kind sha�1 be plac�d within the easement area without the P�� u��'��C�en consent of the City. b o No trash, vaas�e or other o�fensi�re m��er�a1 shall b� placed upon or within the easement aze� wi,thau� �he prior written consent of the Cityo c� The du�ation ot �he easemen� g.�anted herein i� perpetuale 3. Gx°antars, their s�accessars � hei�s and .assigns ae�ree to mai,ntain the easenn�nt ar��. s�abj�ct tc� the p�o�r�szons stated here�za. 4 a This easement �haii. bind and inu�e to the berze�it of the parties, thei� success�rs and assignso 5� Nothiz�g contained herein shali impair any right of the C�.ty nora held, Or �.e�eznafter acqui�°ed to construct or mairxtain public utilities in or on the easement aream T1�I �nTIT1VESS �n7HEREpF, the parties to tI-�is agreemen� hav� caused �hes� presents to be e�ec�.ted as o� the date and year a�oresaido 2 Larry Ro Beach Shelley Ba Beach CITY OF MOU1�IIb5 VIEW B�r its s�ATE o� �zN�ESO�� ) } ss. couN�� oF � The fo�egoa.ng instrumez�t was acknowl.eciged before me this day° of , 199�, by Larry Km Beach and �he].ley� B. Beacix, husband and wi�ea Notary Public S��TE OF �ilrtr�ESO�.� ) y S�m cotaraT� o� � The forego.ing i.ns�r�nent was ac]cno�rledged be��re me th�.� day of , 1996, by , the of the C�ty of Mounds Vi�w, a munia�pal corporation, on behalf of said corporation,m ', Th.a�s instrument was drafted by a Petersan, Fram & Bergman (SHB} 50 East Fifth Street suite �aa st. Pau�, r� ��.az 13037.960001 SHB\MISC\BEACH.EA2 � iVo�a.zy k�ub],ic i t �- The Soutix &2 � 5 feet o� the Nox°�.h 75 feet o� Lot� 10 and llo �pring Lake Pa�k Kno�Is, Ramsey County, Niinnesotao 4 .: , r� �� `�h� Sotatrx 5 feet of the North 17 a 5 �eet of Lot 11, e�ccept the West 38 feet thezeof and the South 5 feet of the North 17m5 feet o� Lot I0, all zn �pring Lake �ark �nol�s, Ramsey Couz�ty, r2inr�esota m ! � 0 I�ie�tan� D�teo 5ta�i°Ite�ort bya Planraing Case I`i�e I�1o.o Item ��6 • � ; � ;�; ' : �°,: �; �- . , ., December 4, 1996 Pamela Sheldon, Comxnunity Development Director 468-9b l�equesio The applicant is requesting a variance in t�he Sign Code to allow the ins�allation af a monumen�-styie directiona.l sign at one driveway entrance on Highway 10 and one on County Road H2. Petitbo�era Locaieo�t: PII� l�oo Saturn Development 2375-2395 Hig�way i0 08-3 0�23 -3 I -0001,2, 3 Zos�ing/L,and LTsee B-3 'i'he property at 2375 Highway 10 is being used for the e�sting Satum � dealership, and at 2395 H[ighway 10 for an existing Gitgo gasoline station. A,p�[�sable Reguiaiiores: Attachments: Bac�ground: The regulations applicable to this request are stated in the attached resalution. Diagram of sign Afi your meeting on November 20, 1996, the Planning Commission discussed a propasal from the Saturn dea.lership ta add two monument signs to their property, which is proposed to expand to include their existing site plus the Citgo gasaline station. The monument signs wauld measure 5 feet high by 8 foot 5.5 inches wide (42.7 sq.ft.) and they would be Iocated at the westemmost driveway on Highway 10 and the eastemzzaost driveway on County Road H2. The Planning Commission indicated that it was favorable to this request since the overall sign area on the site is less than allowed by the Sign Code, and the signs are needed to assist in diracting customer traffic. A resolutian has been prepa.red granting approval for this request. The criteria to be used in evaluaYing the variance are stated in the resolution, along with suggested fmdings as to how the criteria are met. (See attached Resolurion No. 489-96.) Staff Itecore�r�eardation: Apprava.l of the aitached resolution. Jim Price, Satum Development, P.O. BoY 108t3, White Bear Lake, MN 55110; �'AX 490-9416 Darwin Lindahl, Darvvin Lindahl Architects, P.A. 5701 Shingie Creek Parkway, Suite #130, Minneapolis, MN 55430; FAX 560-0441 I c:\office\wpwir�\wQdocsldevcases1�68-961�168-96.sr2 1 i r � _� ,� 8'-b I/a" � I �� iGtiUN1�N i �iC�ti xcT � o �c��.� ��" �� ' _ � - � ' f �S: - �•.: -_ •'. �.. � ,/, ..i - . , i��: ' '' S: �' � ',�- �e�.'�.. �, ;.•�': , �. '..,�: a . '' -�. ;�'. -• ��... . `. -,, ,. � ,,: � 1 ," '� ' ;.... ,. : ... ��:: �''.. �. � �� ', ':�' �`. • � ��. �. �...�. � . . :i '. -.... '� .`�',. � :�.; • .: ':,. , . :-. ':+: y ,, - +':� '��_ ' - 1 ��.. " : � = '� � - J, � ._ � � ; ,�;�. , . . � . ;�,. , ,, , ; , , .. , ��7I�REAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed the reques� from Saturn 17evelopment for the construction of two monument signs at the Sat-�arn Dealership, which is proposed to expand to inciude their exisiing site and the Citgo gasoiine station; and, WH�REAS, the applicant has proposed two monument signs which would be 5 feet high and � feet 6.5 inches wide, or 42.7 sq.ft. and which would be located at the westernmost driveway on Hi�hway l0 and the easternmost driveway on County Road H2; and, . WHEREl�.S, the sign on Highway 10 would'be on the Ci�go gaso[ine station property, and the sign on County Road H2 wauld be on the existing Saturn dealership property; and, WHEREAS, this property is in the B-3 Highway Business District, which allows 100 square feet of signage for each business occupant, and a 340 square foot pylon sign; and, Wi�REAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the criteria used to evaluate variances from the Sign Cade as stated in Section 1008.11 and does hereby nnake the following findings: a. Exceptionai or extraordinary circumstances apply to the properry which do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinity and result from lot size or shape, topogaphy or other circumstances over which the owtters or the property sirtce the effective date hereof had no control, c. That the special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. The Saturn dealership has 764 feet of frontage along Highway 10 and 580 feet oi frontage along County Road H2, and two driveways on each frontage. This amount of frontage is longer than most properties aiong the commercial corridor on Hzghway I0. The City's Sign Code limits properties in the B-3 district to two types af signage: one 340 sq�aare foot pylon sign and business occupant signage not to exceed 100 square feet. The Sign Code does not anticipate the provision of directionaI signage on properties in the B-3 district. Due to the long frontages and the types of activities on this site, directional signage is needed to insure customer sa�ety and smooth traffic flow. The applicaiit's proposal does not increase the total square footage of signage above the amount allowed by the Sign Code, but redistributes sign area from wi�at wouid have been displayed on the pyion sign to two monument-style directional signs. Piannzng Commission Resolution No. 489-96 December 4, 1996 Page 2 b. The literal interpretatio� of the provisians of this Title would deprive the applicant of rights commorily enjoyed by othee properties in the same dzstrict under the terms af this Ti[le. d. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this Title to owners of other lands, structures or buildings in the same district. g. Circumstances under which the literal interpretation of the provisions of this Titte create an undue hardship on the applicant. Economic hardship may be a circumstance for issuance af a variance. The amount of signage allowed on this site will not be increased by the granfing of this variance. The total sign area on the site will be 279 square Feet, where 440 square feet are aliowed. Redistribu�ion of sign area from what wouid be allowed for a pylon sign to monument-siyie directionai signs wilt reduce the visual impact of signage on the site. The applicant wili be unable to provide adequate directionat signage to customers without approval of this variance. Such signage is needed to improve safety and smooth traffic flow. e. That the variance reqnested is the minimu� variance which wouid alleviate the hardship f. The variance requested would not be materiaily detrimental to the purpose of this Title or to other property in the same zone. The amount of signage requested, when added to the existing signage on the site, is 1b1 square feet less than the sign area permitted to the site. The size of the directionai signs in modest in comparison to the scale of the site and the iength of the frontages. The use of directional signage, as opposed to a larger pylon sign, wilt make the signage on the site more fianctional. NOW, THEREFQRE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Mounds View Pianning Commission acting as ihe Board of Adjustment and Appeals does hereby approve the request from Saturn Development for a variance to the Mounds View Sign Code to allow two additional monument signs on the property at 2375-2395 Highway 10, subject to the following conditions: The monument signs shall not exceed 5 feet high by 8 feet 6.5 inches wide (47.5 square feet of sign area) and with one sign to be placed at the westernmost driveway on Highway 10 and one sign at the easternmosi driveway on County Road H2 in accordance with the development review approved by the City Council in Resolution No. 5042. 2. Prior to installation of either sign, the applicant shail obtain a b�itding permit irom the Cammunity Developmen� Department and shaIl pay the appropriate fees, as required by City reguEations. Planning Commission Resolution No. 489-96 December 4, 1996 Page 3 3. Instatiation of the sign on the Citgo property at 2395 Highway 10 shall not occur untii the Saturn dealership obtains ownership of the property. If ownership is not obtained, the allowance for the monument sign on Highway 10 shall be null and void. 4. The style of the monument signs shall be similar to the "Used Car Sales" sign which is Iocated at the eastern end of the property. 5. Any illumination of the signs shall use extemal, ground-mounted light fixtures which are shieided so Yhe ligh� source is noi visible �rom the abutting streeis or any residentia( properties in the vicinity. Adopted this 4th day of December, 1996. Jerry Peterson, Chairman ATTEST: Pamela Sheldon Gommunity Development Director {SEAL) c;loffice\wpwinlwpdocsldevcases1468-96. res . a >< ; ; , ��, � -� � .: 'Y'oo Mounds �liew Planning Commission s &'romo Pamela Sheidon, Community Development Director Subjecio Proposed ScheduIe for Planning Cornmission Mee�in s in 1997 D�te. ll�cember 2, 199b Attached you wi11 find a resolution adopting your meeting schedule for 1997 and a calendar o£ meetings, based on the discuss►on we had at your last meeting. This calendar shows agenda meetings on the third Wednesday of the month (except for January and Juiy) and regular meetings on ihe first Wednesday of the month. The deadline for submittals far the agenda meetings would continue to be the Friday three weeks prior to ihe Friday before th� agenda rzieeting. ihis Friday falls in eiiher ihe last or second to last week of the month. The Planzung Commission suggested that the calendar and the formai %r your meetings be reviewed again vvhen your bylaws are reviewed in January. We are suggesting thai this review be done on January 22, 1997 at your agenda meeting. � I I � �, �, , r . �: �-, °, � - , � . �, ; ,:�, . . �; .: � � � ., �.. . . �; ;l. � . � ;�: . ;, ,, . : �1 �`� E�'Tr�IiLI��I�tG Il�IEETIIVG I)ATES A.NI) �UBIV�IS3IOI� I)E�L.IIVES FOR 1.997 WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission will be holding two business meetings per month during I996, with the exception of Special Meetings, as needed based on development submittals, ardinance revisions, and speciat projects undertaket� by the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the first meeting of the month shall be a regutar meeting at vvhich actions are expected to be taken, and the second meeting of the month shail be an agenda meeting to review and discuss items which will 6a on the agenda for the regular meeti�g in the following month; and, WHEREAS, the usual procedure shall be for items to be discussed fust at an agenda rneeiing and then acted upon at a regular meeting; and, WHEREAS, the deadline for submittal of requests for the agenda meeting shail be the Friday three weeks prior to the Friday befbre the agenda meeiing; and, WHEREAS, devetopers, citizens or other interested parties should be advised of deadlines for submittal of materials used by staff to prepare its report and by Piaz�ning Commission in its discussion of developmeni requests; and, WHEREAS, establishing meeting daYes and deadlines for submittals provides for an orderly system for the Pianning Commission, staff and the genera! pabiie. N4W, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Mounds View does hereby establish meeting dates and deadlines for submittal as shown on the Exhibit 1(Planning Commission Meeting Schedule - 1997}, which is attached hereto and made a part of this resoluiion by this reference; and, . BE IT �URTHER RESOLVED that ii the Planning Commission is required to or desires to hold special meetings, or to catl to order to tai:e action at an agenda meeting, they will do so in accordance with State law, Code requirements and the Bylaws; and, ., BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Pianning Commission may cancel meetings, based on � having no business to conduct, if such canceliations are gosted at the Mounds View City Hall no later than one week prior to the meeting. Adopted this 4th day of December, 1996. 3e�rryry Peterson, Chairman ATTEST Pamela Sheldot►, Community Development Director (SEAL,) ; , • y � � � • . a • ; u�(��aN � I � � �� r�o�°� � � �� a ¢� �� N N � � � CV N C� .� � Q P° ^ N fV � ,—��NtA t�f N � � � � N � ~ � � o N Q � Q �O � � � � � +d� N � �.,a� h �� 0 cn N U '0 ,'., � � •—c�� N N LL n � , a0 N C"�. ,Q�9Q� �� o�� °"" � ,� cn N � � � o � � C/S N P 'o � f1� Q ^ QO � N � r, � � � !° N p- � � o � � �� o� 7� ^ � � � �N � ,� t°� O � � �,�o•�o N I �� y� � � �ri . p` ,T +�. re � °- � �j N N �� O � Q ,� � ,n ev o� N E ai �� O h. e7 .__� N V��C�'p�N �� ry W �I�� N M � � NO N O � � r- ^ Cp � N O� � N N �� ^�cv� �I ,a�°70r\ N N I � � G --- c0 N CV LL .p � O . � �N�'N Lt! z�� ^ � � �jOrev ^ N � �P �NC"3 � ^m^CV N U) PJ � P� Q �--. ^ N t°7 t.L N O� `� o r-� �c� �NN � �Q� � N m C r �� CV N � � cv o, ,o N �, �,�� C4 u) ,pe?oN � L[i e�r U � w'- �r�� m �� cv a 'O c t,,�° g ��,cncvo- N CV cn r�`�^� N � � N ..- Cp � N O� ^ CV N � h � � ^ CV LU e— ,d � p � d ; � � P �O o ps, �°a ,o � C�V � "'°^N � � a � a �.- �, M1 � � "° � C'�f u,. r-, n i. .-. c7 � ►-- N U 'o N O � °�C�� O�~ ^�N� � ,Qc"70� c� t� N O� �O ^ N I � „0 P d I� CV N Lt` � ' N � � � N W a-° � „v m ��O �� h— � p-- c� o, '� � O� � ^��c�o, �� n �.��,� >, .� � � O � � � � � � � O � � i � U C� C Q U a� � {(� � � � � � � Q3 .� U � � C � N � O � � � � .� �� — Q � � •C � � � � � (Q � �� o� � � o � � � � � � � (II �-- � p � � � � � � � �� a�i �� o O � � � � o � l.l_ � � 01 f d � � { ITEM ��9A � � �. �. �'�o Mounds View Plar�ning Commission Froan: Pamela Sheido�, Communiiy Deveiopment Director � r �ubjecta Resolufion 484-96: Mounds View Squa.re Shopping C�nter I)ate: December 2, 199b Attached you will find a revised version of ResoIution No. 484-9b which approved the variance in sign regulations for the Mounc{s View Square Shopping Center. It incorporates the changes which the Plannin� Cornmission approved at your Noverr�ber 20, 1996 meeting. Because oithe number of changes, staff indicated at that meeting that we would provide you with tlie revised wocd'zng be%re given the resolution to the chairman ta sign. We have noted the additions with underlinin� and the deletions with strikeouts, to assist the Pianning Cammission in its review. We have included this item on your agenda under 5tai�Reports to just confirm that we have made the revisions correctiy. c:\o8"icelwpwinlwpdocsldevcases1462-961pcmemo.res s. �� r� � � � i � �, ,. �; � . � , �: :. . � , ; .. �; ,, r � ,: ;� � � �� _ �� ; � : �•�- � �; �� . � � .. : ` �1 � ;.J ` =�= ; ;1; � �� , ,�; f � C ' ! ` ,• . � � � `1= ;� . _� ,� :� � �,, ,: °� � • •; , . , . �. .. , I �' _ ,. ,+ ' Y; VVI-�E1�EAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed the request from Mounds 'View Assoc. LLP for the construction of fbur monumertt signs at ihe IVlounds View Square Shopping Center, vvith two of these signs to be placed at the driveway entrasices from Highway 10, one at the intersection of Long Lake Road and Highway 10, and one at the intersection of Count Road I and Hi hwa 10; and, WHEREAS, the applicant has proposed these monurnent signs to each be 12 feet in height and 18 %et in width, for an area of 216 square feet; and, �REAS, this property is in the B-4 zoning district, which allows 100 square feet of signage fot each tenant, and a 340 square foot pylon sign; and, '> ', WHEREAS, the City of IVlounds View is proposing to construci a pedestrian bridge across I3ighway 10 just west of Long Lake Road; and, WHEREAS, the position of t�e bridge will block the view of a partion of the shoppin� center's face and its center identification sign from vievv by motorists traveling on Highway 10, from east to west; and WHEREAS, the heaviest traffic in the east to west direction is evening, homebound commute traffic, when motorists are more Iikely to stop to shop than motorists traveling to work; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the criteria used to evaluate variances from the Sign Code as stated in Section 1008.11 and does hereby make the following findings: a. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to the property which do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinrty and result from lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over which the owners or the properiy since the effective date hereof had no controt. c, That the specia( condiiions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the appIicant. The property is developed with a retail buiIding that is L-shaped and set back from Highway i0. The City is proposing to constnact a pedestrian bridge across Highway l0 at Pianning Commission Resotution No. 484-96 November 20, 1946 Page 2 Long Lake Road which wiii block the view of a portion of the front face of ihe shopping center and its center identification sign until motorists travel under the bridge. The monument signs proposed at the two driveway entrances will alert motorists to where io turn in the most efficient way possible, since they will be at the roadway edge and more at eye level. They will compensate foc the lack of visibility of ihe center. At present it is very di#iicult to find the driveway entrailces into Mounds View Square at night. The monument sign a� the intersection of Long Lake Road and Highway 10 wzll provide signage in advance of the bridg� structure �or motorists traveling west, wi'ich is needed since the bridge will block the vier� of the center identification sign. � b. The literal interpretation of the provisions of this Title would deprive tize applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this Title. d. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is deriied by ihis iitle to owners of other lands, str�actures or buildings in the same district. g. Circumstances under which the iiteral interpretation of the provisions of this Titie create arz undue hardship on the applicant. Economic hardship may be a circumstance for issuance of a vanance. The Sign Code allows for tenan� identification signs and one pyion sign to identify ihe overall shopping center. The construction of a pedestrian bridge will btock the visibility o�F both the tenant signage and the pylon sigr� for l�lounds View Square until motorzsts have traveied under the bridge. The visibility of other shopping centers in Mounds View will not be impacted by the bridge construction. Ali other properties which abut Highway 10 have clear visibiiity from the highway and are not obscured by overhead structures. The impact on Mou��ds View Square will be the most significant due to the angle of the highway, the layoui of the shopping center and the position of the bridge. e. That the variance requested is the minirtatam variance which would alleviate the hardship. f The variance requested would nol- be materially detrimental to the purpose of this Title or to other property in the same zone. The applicant has requested four monument signs, measuring 12 feet tall and 18 feet wide. One is proposed to be tocaied at the intersection of Long Lake Road and Highway 10, in advance of the bridge s�ructure to alert motorists to the upcoming shopping cenier, two at the driveway entrances from Highway 10, and one at the intersection of Count� Road I and I�i�hwav 10. The first three signs are needed because the center identifica�ion sign v+rill be bloeiced by the bridge from motorists' view when they travel from easi io wesi on Highway I0. The size of the signs is approximately half the height of mon�ament style i Planning Commission Resolution No. 484-9b November 20, 1996 Page 3 signs aIong Highway 10 and elsewhere used as the sole identification foc shopping centers. Th� signs at the driveway entrances are needed to provide a �anmistakable visual signal at the roadside, close to eye i�vel, of the pcesence of the shopping center since motorists will have tess reaction time than if they had an unimpeded view of the center identification sign traveling ioward Mounds View Square on Highway 10. With the design requirements in the conditions attached to this variance, the signs vvi11 he tied into the landscape and 6e less intrusive. �This variance does not �rant approval foc the monument sign at CountX Road I and Highwav 10.) N4W, T`HE�FORE, BE IT RE�OLVEI3, that the Mounds View Planning Commission acting as the Board of Adjustment and Appeals does hereby approve a modificataon oithe variance request of �Iounds View Assoc, LLP allowin� for three monument signs, with one sign to be placed at each of the two d�iveway entrances from Highway 14, and one sign io be placed at the iniersection of Long �Laice Road and Highway 10, subject to the following conditior�s: This variance is being granted in recognition of the anti�ipated construction of a pedestrian bridge using a spiral ramp design at the intersection of Long Lake Road arrd Highway 10. The signs permitted by this variance shall only be constructed after commencement of construction of the pedestrian bridge, and only if th� bridge uses the spiral ramp design. The applicant is responsible for obtaining sign permits from the City prior to construction of #he signs. 2. The two signs at ihe driveway entrances shall consist of a monument style sign or "sign wall" eonstructed of brick, stone or break-off decorative block and measurin� at a maximum 10 �-2 feet in height and 15 �$ feet in widih. This "sign wall" shaEl have an added wall extension on either side approximately four feet in heighi and � feet in length, finiished with a capstone as is shown for the sign. The sign wall and wall e�ensions shall be curved, to reduce the appearance oFits mass and to approximate the curvature of the drive�svays. Earth shall be bermed against the backside of the sign walI and the wall extensions. �ra� Landscaping shall be planted behind the sign to include at least three trees in a cluster, which shall be of a species which vvill gro�w at matur�t� approximatel� the same hei�ht as the sign . Landscaping may be designed to remain low in fi-ont of that portion sign having wording. The finaI design of the sign wall and sign extensions, and the landscaping plan sha11 be subject to approval by the Direetor oiCommunity Development prior sign permi�s being issued and [andscapin� being installed. , � • The color of the masonry shall be compatible wieh the existing brick used in the shopping center, subject to approval by the Director of Cammunity Development prior to issuance oi sign pernu�s. Pianning Commission Resolution No. 484-96 November 20, 1996 Page 4 3. The sign at each driveway entrance shall be located on the northwest side of the driveway mor�a�s�s as shown in the diagram submitted with this application. _ _ � een9. ' 4. Foc the signs at fihe d�iveway entrances, no more than 3/4 � of the sign wall m�y be used for wording (i.e, that portion of the wall face which is 10 � feet x 15 i� feet} as measured using rectangies around each business's c�ame and the shopping center's nazne. Letters shall not exceed 1%at 6 inches in height. No wording may appeac on the wall exiensions. All lettering for tenants names shall be uniform cotor e�cept that a corporate color scheme inte�ral to the identity of the companX ma,��used. The lettering for the name of the shopping center ma.y be the same color or a contrasting color. Lettering may be internally illuminated or the sign may have indirect iiluminaiion from ground lighting. Any ground lighting shall be shielded so light rays are ciirected to the sign, but the lighi source is not visible to the street or parking area. 5. Signage shall be limited to the name of individual businesses and the name of the shopping center. A partion of the sign face shall be used for the shopping center name. 6. The design of the sign to be installed at the intersection of Long Lake Road and Highway 10 shall be coordinated with the design of the bridge and be located outside the required sight lines for ihe Hi�h�va�IO,/Long La�Ce Road intersection. This variance allows for 145 square feet of sign area to be used for wording, not to exceed 10 feet l�i�h, of which �/i �ortion shall be used for the name of the shopping center . The City shall determine the height and length of the wail and its placement, in consultation with the applieant, as long as the sign area allowed by this variance is accommodated. If the applicant desires to display signage on the wall, the applicant shall be responsible for the cost of constructing up to 280 square feet of wall at this location, uniess an aiternative funding arrangement wi�h the City is approved by the City Council. Planning Cortunission Resolution No. 484-95 November 20, 1996 Page 5 Adopted this 20Yh day ofNovember, 199b. ATTEST: (SEAL) c:lwpdocsldevcases1462-96pc.re2 I Jerry Peierson, Chairman Pamela Sheldon Commurrity Development Director i i ITEM 4�98 �� ,� :� � �a: Mounds View Planning Commission Fa-om: Pamela Sheidon, Community Developmeni Director'�� ub,�eete Revisions to Format for Minuies � Daie, November 25, I996 At your last meeting, the Plarining Commission asked staffto revise the format for the minutes and make therz� shortec. Attached you will find a sample of how we propose to ci�ange the format, using ihe minutes from the November 6 meet�ng. We have also included the te� from the Mounds View Shopping Center cases ta illustrate how we might cut down ihe lengih of the text. The key changes in the format are: � eliminating the two cotumns, and placing the numbered items from the agenda at the ieft - _�� hand margin e including an index showing which cases were discussed at the meeting and where io find t�em in the minutes • "announcing" each case by putting the request at the left hand margin and putting lines be%re and after it m bolding and underlining each 1Vlvtian/S�cond . � bolding the names of the Comrrussioners, applicants azad citizens who commen# in the minutes to make them easier to find o indenting the text under each case so it is easier to read than a fuil page width We need to know from the Planning Commission if the changes in format are acceptable, and whai you think about how we have cut the text. We could cut the text even further, and need your guidance an this point. If tlus format is acceptable, we would being using it for the minutes prepared fbr the November 20 meeting. � fi. i i ;:. , _ ,., ' i ;; . . ; �.. r .,, _ ■�� . � - 7� ►-':'. ', ��; �", � � � ��'1 . � . + ! ��:: - � � �: �� ` Regular Meeting 1Vovember 6, 199� IVlounds View City Hall 2401 �lighway 10, i�o�ands View, NiN 55112 1. Call fo Order Th� Niounds View Planning Commis�i�n was called fo order by Chair Pe4erson at 7:03 p.m. on November 6, 1996 2. Roll Cail Members Present: Commissioners Nii((er, Brooks, Steven�on, Obert, Johnston, �rasaemle and Chair Peterson. Also Present: Communify Development Director Sheldon, Planning Associate Ericson and Recording Secretary �enesch. 3. Approva! of Minutes: October 9, 1996 The Planning Commission reviewed the minutes of the speciai mee�ing of O�tober 9, 1956. The following correctians were �oted: 1) Page 1, fast line, "by" should read on, 2) Page 2,. fihird iine, "site" should read sifies. 3} Second page, third paragraph, lines 6 and 7 should read "if the loi is" and "Commission" should read Commissioner, 4) Page 3, line 3, should read "...line for a...", 5) Page 3, paragraph 6, line 2, should read acre not "acres" and line 4 should read "...than one acre. ." Mot�on/Second: Brasaemle/Stevenson to approve the minute� of October 9, 1996, as amended. Motion carried on a vote af 7 ayes, 0 nays. 4. There w�re no re�ident requests or comments fram fhe floor. fnc6ex to Minutes -..- Case No. 461-96, 4G2-96, 463-96: Mounds !liew Square Shc�pping Center 2 Case No. 464996: Saturn Development 9 11�ounds View Pianning Comenission Regular Nfeefing Novemb�r 6, � 996 Page 2 5. Ptannirtg Case No. 46'-96, 462-�6, 463-96 2535-2585 Higt�way 10 Applicant: Paster Enterprises (dba: PUfounds View,4ssoc. LLP) Req�test for varianc� in pa�kir�g rafios, in sign height and sign area; conditional use permit for joini use of parking facilities. Chair I'eierson op�ned the publi� hearing on fhe variance c�ses. (Vir. John Streeter �nd fVlr. �dward F'aster, repr�senting Paster Enterprises, vvere present. Community Deveiopment Dir�c#or Sheldon explained fhat the a�plicant was reques�ing a variance in fhe parking ratios applicable to ihe project, a variance in sign heigh� and sign area, and a condifiiona! use permit for joinf use of parking facifities at the (1�ourtds View Shopping Cenier, 2535�2585 Highway 10. She sugges#ed to the Planning Commissian #hat these cases be presenied in two parfs: first, the cases related #o parking and second, ihe case re(ated fo sign height and area. The app(icant was proposing to expand the shoppir�g center tp add 5,000 squ��e feefi of retail space, and replace the tv�+o exis#ing, freestanding restaurants {Hardee's and Bridgeman's} with #wo dir�ner house style restaurants. The cases related fo parking concerned khe ratios which would be used to determine if sufficieni parking was avaiiab{e, and whether the applicant could reduce the parking needed due to off-setting daytime �nd nightfime uses. The current number of spaces on the sifie is 477. If the expansion occurred, some parking spaces wauld be eliminated so there were 454 left on #he site. Commissloner Millerasked if the tota! square footage with the addition was 911,i75 or 119,535, since both numbers were in fihe si�ff report. Director Sheldon responded that the correct number was 111,535 square feefi. Director Sheldon noted that this issue had been discussed at previous Planning Commission meetings. It was staff's understanding from the (�st meeting that ttie Cammission was willing to consider #he 477 spaces on the site as adequate for the currenf square foatage. The proposal is to appfy new ratios io the square footage which would be removed and would be add�d to fhe site. The ratios wo�aid be 4.5 spaces per 1000 squar� feet of retail space, 0 spaces for storage, 1 space for every 40 sq.ff. of fasfi faod dining area, 1 space for every 80 �q.ft. of f�st food kitchen area, and 1 space for every 80 sq.ft. of dinner house restaurant {bofih dining area and kitch��). These rafiios are more in Eine wifh ct�rrenf pracfice in other j�ari5dictions. The current ratio is Mounds View for retai! space is 10 spaces per 100Q sq.ft. which she noted is very high. ihe ratio fior dinner �' : f�ounds View Pl�nning Comrrzission Regular Meeiing November 6, 1996 Page 3 house restaurants recognizes the lower customer turnover as compared 4o fast food restauranis. Sfiaff has prepared Resofution No. 4�5-96 which wauld approve a variance in parking ratios for fihe expansion of il�ounds View Square She then explained the request for joint use of parking facilities. Th� number of parking spaces needed for the expansion wo�ld be 492, if the new raiios are applied to the fooiages being deducted and added. This number is higher than to ane reported at the Commissior�`s last m�eiing, and is 38 more spaces than will be on the siie with the expansion (454). It is not possible to add these spaces through r�striping to compact size stalls, which had been fihe Commission's suggestion at fihe las� meeting. The applicant was proposing an 8% credit for offsetting daytim� and nightfiime uses to show thaf the 454 spaces were adequate to meet the parking demand on the site. Staff had prepared Resolution No. 486-96 which would re�ommend to Cify Council tha� a conditional use permif be approved ailowing for the 8% reduction in parking spaces based on joint use of parkir�g facilities between daytime and nighttime uses. Cornrnissiorrer Brasaerrrle asked if the variance in ratios woufd result in a `'' requirement for 492 spaces and wanted io verify if the conditional use permit w a s n e e d E d t o g e t t h e number down to the 454 s paces, which fihe appiicant was � proposing to provide. We also asked if the maximum allowabEe cross-over between night and day use is 50 percent and if siaff was proposing an[y 8 percenfi. i Comrrrissioner Stevenson asked if there is any alternafiive #o the spaces the shopping center is losing for the storage area, why is fhe 5,000 square feet needed and what use woufd go inio it. Mr Streeter explained that they initiaily praposed io expartd the shQpping center further ta the south. in discussions with staff, ifi was noted that expansion in thafi direction woc�ld c�use more than one row of parking to be losfi so they reduced the expansion to save all i�ut one row of parking. �i�air Peterson asked howr the signage at Marios would be aifected by the expansion. M� Sireef�r said he expected that whoever r�nted ihe new area would want to have ifi for their advet�ising, or there was a possibility thaf Marios would move over and ihe. new tenant would accupy the space in between. C�mrrrissiorte� Ober°� asked if the new parkir�g compufatior�s incfuded ihe eliminafion of the 23 spaces ot� the south side ofi the building. Qirector Sheldon explained that they were included, a�d that is why the parking cnunt went frorr� 477 to 454. � i Mounds Vie�nr Planning Corrymission Fiegular li�eeiing Noverv�be� 6, 1996 Page 4 Cornrrt�ssian�r Mdller referred to Page 2, part C. of Resolution No. 4$5-96, and said she felfi fhat adding the S,OOQ square feet to the building v�ras an actian iaker� by th� applicant, i.e. a s�if-imposed hardship, and asked why 6,OQ0 square feet is being used for the dinner h�use restaurants. Director Sh�Idon explained that the r�iios in the Cify's code create a harciship for a shopping center of �his size and that the applica�t did nai choose the ratio. Tf�e hardship is coming from 4he ra�io rather fhan fihe square footage being added by the applicant. She nofied that the 6,000 square fs�t for the dinner house rest�urants came from the applicant's pian. Com►nissiorrer �rasaenale suggested leaving the parking count for fhe current shopping center as is, and use the raiios from fihe Code fo calculate fhe amount of parking needed for the expansion. He asked vvhat pefcentage reduciion would be needed using the allaw�nce for daytime and nightfime uses to gef fo the 4�4 spaces being provided. He ir7dicaied his desire to address the parking questior� with �ither a variance or an allowance for daytime and nighfiime uses, but r�oi both if possible. �irector Sheldon responded thafi it would take a 26% reduction to go from 492 to 454 spaces. Director Sheldon explained that she felt it was easier fio show ihat there was a probfem with the ratios and fix it #hrough a variance rather ihan j�sst using fhe daytime-nighttime reduciion. She noted that if you appty the current ratios to the square footage that is changing, there would be 6�i4 spaces required buf noted that there may be a problem with how the 614 spaces were calcula�ed. � Coerrmtlssioner Stevertso� asked wi�ich time would be the busiesfi for �he shopping center. He was concerned if the ratias were not changed, and only the reduction fflr dayfiime and nighttime uses were used, there would not be enough parking at peak times. Corrtmfssioner �rasaerre% asked whai would be the fiotai n�amber of parking spaces that woufd be needed for the entire center incfuding the expansion, using the curren# ratios. Dir�cfor Sheldon replied that i# would be 1,035 spaces. Comrrrissione� �Iohnston said thai he feeis ihaf fihis propos�l v,roufd be good for Mounds View and is for granting this requesfi but it is a matter of how #o do if. Chair P��er�on said that he had simiiar feelings ar�d thinks fha� the Planning Commission needs to lay a more stabfe grour�d-work far any other cases fh�t m�y come up and thaY he feft m�re com�ortable with the resolutian as prepared rr�hich included the variance in rafios. �ommis��orr��° Obe�°°f said he is comfortabie with th� w�y staff has prepared the :; i 4 � Maunds View Planr�ing Commission Regular i�eeting November 6, 1996 6�ag� 5 reso{utior�, but shares fihe concerns fhat Cammissioner Stevenson raised regarding the daytime/night#ime mix. He felt fhat righi now he did r�oi see a problem, but depending on future fenants, such as a high-firaffic store, there coufd be a concern. �ornmissioraer �ras�entle noted that he feels one advantage to granting a variance is tP�at it daes not establish a preceder�t if the CounciC rejects the condifional use permi� and r�tracted #�is proposai io eliminate ihe variance. �ornrrrlssione� M�Iler had concerns with losing the 23 spaces by making the building S,OOO square feet larger when there are already vacant retai! spaces and wondered if they might change if there were more iraffic. Director Sheldan explained that by adding fhe restauranis you may get more inferest in the center. She also added that if people do go out fio dinner and #hen run �rrands to the other businesses in the center, they are still or�ly using one space. �'at�I �iamilton, Sunrise l�ettaodisg �f�urctt, 76g7 Long Lake Road, asked if traf�ic from khe shopping center could accidenfally overflow into their church parlcing lot across the street. He did note that they have not had a problem as o� yet. He was also concerrted with the dumping of garbage into ihe wetiand adjacent to the church. Comrrrisslon�r �ililler suggested thaf signage, "Sunrise Church parking only" could alfeviate this concern. MotionlS�cond: BrasaemlelBrooks to approve Resolution No. 4�5-96, as amended, regarding appraving a variance request in the parking ratios applicabie to the 11�ounds View Square Shopping Center, Plannie�g Case No. 463-95. Commissioner 11�i(Cer notecf some corrections to proposed Resolution No. 485-9f: 1) Page 2, line 1, "result" shouid read results, 2) third Whereas, item a, lin� 2, "o�' should read of. I�otion c�rried ort a vote of 7 ayes, 0 nays. Moiion/Second: �rasaemEe/Stevenson to approved Resalution No. 486-96, as amended, regarding �ecommending approving a conditional use permit for the joini use of parking facilities at Nlounds View Square Shopping Center, Planr�ing Case No. 461- 96. The word "Recomm�nding" was added to 4he resolufiion. Commis�ioner Miller noted that ifem 7 in the resolution may noi be necessary. Director Sheldon explained that fihis ifiem indicates that the variance cannot stand by ifiself. The Commission direcied that ifiem 7 be moved io a Whereas clause. li�otion �arried on a vote c�fi 7 ayes, 0 nays. *�� i ..�i�, .� ' � ;�.:. ,': ;: - ;: ;:. ..� :� _ -- , ll�ounds View Planning Cammission Novem�er 6, 1996 Reguiar Meeting ��e � Director Sheidon explained that the secortd parf of the request periained to fhe signage for f�ounds View Square Shopping Cenier, and that the proposal has be�n changed by the �pplicani. ih� origina! proposai was fnr a 75 foot high, 800 square fooi sign. ihe Planning Commission had reque�fed information on how much of the sign would show above fihe bridge. She reported on a study conducted by the Ciiy Engineer which estimated ihat the bridge would cover up 52 fee� of fihe sign, when viewed from a disfiance representing 10 seconds of travel �ime at 50 mph on Highway 10, e�st cafi �he sign. ff the sign were 75 feet high, #hen 23 fieet would shovv above Yhe bridge. She expfained that ihe applicanf is now proposirtg a sign which would be 50 feet high, and have 430 square �eet of sign area. Signs at the other shopping cer�ters owned by the applicant (Mendofia Pi�za, Crysta! Cenfer, ar�d Norihway Cenfier) were reviewed. The sigr� at fVler�dota Pfaza w�s ti�e same as the one requested by the applicant for Mounds View Square. I�irector S�teldon explained thaf once you low�r the sign, even to 50 feet, you cannot see it over fhe bridge, so from stafF's perspective, you have losi tt�e connection betw�en the bridge and the need for a variar�ce. She suggested several ways to address this issue; 1) amending the Code, 2} a variance requesf for monument signage at the driveway enirances and at Long Lake Road, 3) reducing fhe pylon sign to fiit within fhe current code, , 4) add a proced�re for approving "sign programs or packages" io the City's code which v✓ouid allow customized sign regulations for the iarger shopping centers in Mour�ds View, 5) grant a variance for a"flaating box" of signage from the top of the bridge railing to 75 feet, with a condition that the variance could not be used unless fihe bridge is builf and the City has six months in which to update iis Sign Code. Ii the Sign Code is amended to allow a sign program, #hen the appiicant could noi use the "fioating box". Direcfor Sheldon suggested that the Commission fiable this ifiem untii a firmer proposai is made and more information is ob#ained from the applicant. Commissioner �rasaernl� wanted to make it clear that fhis variance request is contingent upon the bridge being buiffi and whatever variance is passed by fihe Commission needs to have fhis clause in ifi. .JoAnn Colle�ra, 26�7 Cocaniy Roadl, ask�d why the parking and signs are being dealf with r�ow if w� don't even know ifi fihe bridge c�f the dinner house restaur�nfs wil! be builfi, ii was explair�ed fhai before the applicanf ev�n considers builciing fhe restaurants, they would need to know if adequate par�ing is available to inform fu�ure tenants and ii is only fhe sign request fhat is reiated io the consfrucfiion of the bridge. !f wa� added that if was easier to came fo the Planning Commissi�n with both of fhese iiems at once. Ms. Colleen expressed her concern aboui the construction of a iigh#ed sign and the view from her window. She afso expressed concern wi#h other businesses wanfing taller signs. �� , 1 i Mounds View �lanning Commission R�gular Mee#ing November 6, 1996 Pag� 7 �arB �lamelforr, expiained a signag� siivation that he experienced as a residenf of Blaine, and tha� the busin�ss w�s required to reduce is signage so that it did �ot fake away from the surrounding businesses and homes �r they would not get a building permit_ .fohrr Sgreeter, addressed ihe Commission showing thern drawings of their ofher shopping ceniers and explaining fiheir proposed sign size and th� lac�tion of the pylon sign with respecf 40 �o�ands View Square. He said it was very similar to the sign ai I�endota Pi�za. He pointed out tha# signs and the size of the lettering are sized by traffic engirreers ba�ed on fhe locaiion of ti�� sign and distance to motorists. Discussion continued between the applicant and the Planning Commissior� regarding the similarities af the Nlendota sign and fhe proposed sign for tViounds View Square. C��rrr�sslon�r Johnsion expressed concern with �he possibility of other Mounds View Square tenants requesting separaie signage for their businesse�. He asked far more information on how a sign program would work. A comment was made thafi a sign program is a comprehensive package could include signage for ir�dividual tenants, signs at enirances, an overall center identification sign, signs for pad sifies. A commenf w�s made #hat ii is simii�r to a PUD for signs. Commessioner �rasaeml� asked about �he signage for the other pad sites. The applicant indicafied thai tenants are often demanding and want pale signs, but if a locaiion is very desirabfe, they are willing to us� monumeni signs. Cammissioner Brasaemle wanted all of the signs expected on the site to be addressed at the same time. Corrrrrlps�i�r►e�° Obert expressed his concern how this sign propasa{ would rel�te fio the entire picture along Highway 10. �irecfior Sheldon r�oted that the City Coun�il expects fo hire � consulfiant t� work on desigr�s for fhe secfiion of Highway 10 narfh of iViounds View Square, and ar�y design iheme they dev�lop for that section will probably be extended to the south. She also noted that if the Planning Commission sefis a good standard or� this �ifie, the City will be okay on other shopping cer�ter sifes that propose new signage. �ornrni�sio�er Oberi again expres�ed sor�e conce�n and thought the Planning Corrtmission needs to make sure that these standards are sef high enough. �'.i Nlaur�ds Viern� Planning Commissiort Regular �eeting November 6, 1996 ��ge � �om�risseoner �rasaerrtle a�ked the app�icant what they �xpect�d fihe cPinner h�use resfaurants wouid want �or sigr�age, especially pole signs versus monument signs. t�r. Edward Paster replied that usua!!y the tenant w�nfis an id�ntification sign that separates them from every�ne else and that mortument signage is n�t alway� accepted. He also said that promoting tenant names instead of shopping center names is now the trend. He fhought i€ a monument sign were plac�d at fihe intersectior� of Long Lake Road and Highway 10, it would be an innovative approach. H� said ifi would be a hard sell �o get fenants fo go o� a monument sign as oppo�ed to a poi� sigr�. Chasr Peterson asked if fhe Planni�g Commission had everything they needed fio give this case furth�r car�sideration. Director �heldon indicated that she needed a diagram th�t shows fihe locafions where they wani the signage and also a drawing of ihe signage itself as to what pack�ge goes wifh #he variance. Cornrr��sseoner Stevenson suggested fihaf staff provide the Commission wifih informati�n on whafi other fypes of signage are along �iighway 10. Jod4nr� Colleen, asked if ihe requested monument signage wouid also be foc�ted afi the er�france ort 4he r�or4h side of the shopping center. Mr. Streeter repfied that ihey were not asking for signage fhere. MotioNSecond: i1�iller/Johnston to table the discussion of fihe �ignage for Mounds View Square until the Commission's next agenda meefing. Motion carried on a vofe of 7 ayes, 0 n�ys. Director Sheldor� asked that fhe Pfanning Commission consider calling to order ai their November 20 meeting io #ake acfion on this item and its was Planning Commission's consensus that ifi woufd be a pcassibility thai they could ca(f to order contingent upon rc�ceiving adequate information on this case. ; � , . ; , , ; ,: � _. . , ;: ,: ;. , _ .. - - .__ _ ,. �::. • ---'` . _.. "_. _... _ ___ {Vlound� View Planning Commission Nevsmber 6, 1996 Regular Meeting page 9 �. Plar�n�rtg Cas� N�o 464-96 2375-23°5 Highway 10 Applicani: Saturn C�evelopmeni Request for am�nded canditional use permit to allow expansion of an exisiing a�atc� dealership, i�e addition of a car wash and expansion of available repair services. Chair F'etersan opened the public inforrmati�n rr�eeiing on this item. Mr. Jirn Price and �arwin Lindahl, representing the applicar�t, Satur� Development, were presenf. ��i 1 I�r�iocar�/Se�ond; MillerlF'etersort approved Fiesolution �o. 483-96 recomme�ding approvai of ar� amended co�ditional use permii and a development review far th� expansion of the Saturn Deal�rship afi 2375 and 2395 Fiighvvay 10, Planning Case No. 464-96. � t�otion carried on a vote of 5 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absterttion. {Commissioner Stevenson at�s4ained due to his son being employed at the Saturn Dealership.). Chair Peiersort informed the applicant thafi this item will be heard by the City Council on November 25. � 7. Staff Reports/lr�forrr�aiion Items Planning Associate Ericson provideei an updafe on Planr�ing C�se No. 460-96: Auto Centrai which was h�ard at the October 7, 1996 meeting. The property is owned by Norw�st Bank. There are now two different parties considering the property for an auto servicing businesses, and ihe bank is afso ialking with the City about buying fihe site. The application is on hold at fhis time. Direcfor Sheldan informed the Planning Commission of item� that are sched�aied to be heard at their next meefing: the variances on signs for �'aster Enierprises ar�d for Saturn Development, a lofi spiit request from Larry Bea�h, and a draft of fihe te(ec�mmunications ordinanc�. 'i Mounds View Planning Commission Regular Meeting : Gf�airperson ar�d Pfanning Commissioner Reports Novemher 6, 1996 Page 10 Both Commissioner� Obert and f1l1iller attended the Goun�if wark session on Nnvember 4 fio represent the Planning Gommission regarc�ing communicatiort between fihe commissior�s and the Ciiy Council. Commissioner Obert commented that C�mmissioner Miller made a v�ry good pres�nt�iion but fhat the Council was u�responsive and he expressed his cor�cern with the cc�mmunication probl�m. Director Sheldon s�ggest�d fhaf this item be discussed a� the reireat that will be scheduled between Sfaff and #he G�ty �ouncil. Corr�missioner Johnston brought up � concern regarding #he condition�l use permif �hat was approved for Colonial Vilfage Niobife Home Park approximately one year ago which ailowed them fio selE homes. He indicated thaf this permi� should k�e comir�g up for review soon. He informed #lie Commission that he has received compiaints regarding ih� p�rmit and added that there were people in fhe park tha� were unhappy about it. s 9. Aitendance at Agenda iVleeting: Chair Peterson noted fhe members present at the Ocfober 23, 1996 specfal meeting: Commissioners Mifler, pbert, Brooks, � Stevenson, and Chair Peierson. (Commissioners Johnston and Brasaemle had excused absences}. Planning Associate Ericson was also preseni. 10. Adjournment There b�ing no further business befare the Pianning Commissian, Chair Peterson adjoumed the meefiing at 10; 36 p. m. Res}aectfully s�bmitted, Pamela Sheldon Community Development Direcfior ! > :. ; : � -:: ', �,�� ; To: From: Subject: ,.. Maunds View Planning Commission E� j ; .; , � Item ��4 fy< . t� i r::r ' 3 ? , :C:%. � �:�..• ,r'�t 1'_ � � �; � r r ,.. � � �,� � � � �' '... ��:,, t�� ,�' �`:: -- �:�..� 1 , �.� ��.1 �{' �� James Ericson, Planning Associate Commercial Wireless Telecornmutucations Towers and Antennae Planning Case No. SP-001-96 Date: T�ecember 11, 1996 Meetin� of December 18, 199b Issue On August 12, 1996, fihe City Council approved a 180-day moratorium on the new use, development or construction oi wireless telecomrnunications services within the City {4rdinance No. 587). This moratorium is set to expire on March 8, 1947. The Planning Commission held a special session on October 23, 1996 to discuss this fopic at tn�hich meeting industry representatives were present to give short presentations and to answer questions. Sta� presented the Commission with a draft ordinance for review on December 4, 199b, which generated additional comments and suggestions. These changes have been incorporated into a revised draft ordinance. Recommentiation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission review the attached revised draft o£ the wireiess telecommunica#ions ordinance and make suggesiions and or comments as to its content and provisions. If the Ptanning Commission considers the ordinance acceptable, staff recomrnends that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 49I-96 recommenciing approval of the ordinance to the City Council. Analysrs A number of changes ha�e 6een made to the proposed ordinance. Any language that has been added since the December 4, 1996 meeting is shaded. Some language has been deiefied as a resuit of the thai meeting and suggestions made by City Attomey Bob Long. Fnrrr�a8 for �ec�aosa ora Dasi�icts f111owin� 7'elecorramu�eacrataarrs �'acili�aes: The revised ordinance places the text in section 112b.43, Subd. 2 relaiing to conditional uses into a tabfe ehat enhances readability and comprehension. � �� .�� r � . i Planning Commission Planning Case No. SP-001-96: Telecommunications Ordinance December I2, I996 Page 2 Accessory �uildi�gs: Also in 5eciion 1126.03, Subd. 2, the requirement for CLTPs for accessory buildings in the PF and CRP districts was deleted. In a subseqtaent section of the ordinance, text was added that amends the PF and CRP districts to ailow accessory equipment structures only when associated with a CWTS tower and/or antenna as a permitted accessory use. Also regarding accessory equipment struciures, te�rt was added to the co�-locatian requirements section that addresses how new buildings would be treated in relation to existing buildings. Laradsccaping �.Screenin�: Added to the ordinance is a seciion that makes explicit the Iandscapin� and screening requirements. Basically, a tree-screen of evergreens and omamental deciduous trees is required to be planted around the fence so �hat at Ieast 50% of the accessory str�ucfure and/or iower base is screened from view. Because some sites may not need landscaping either because existing foliage is su�cient ar because ihe site might be in ihe middle of an industrial site parking lot, the screenir�g and landscaping requirement can be waived. 1`'irocedural �equirements. The other major change to the ordinance from its previous version is the additior� of a list of submittal requirements for CUPs, simitar ta what had been listed under buitding pernut requirements. Those requirements were moved under the CUP heading because ihe informatior� would be needed in order to approve a CUP. If no CtJP is required, then the same ir�formation wouid be required to be submitted with the buiiding permit application. Also in the procedural section, a cIarification was made to the proof of insurance requirement and an ``; abandoned tower ctause was added. Ca-location: We have removed the requirement for a"letter of intent" which would have required all new towers to ailow �or co-location. This change was primarily made due to Iegal considerations. The provision would not be workable anyway, because it was the Planning Commission's desire that an applicant have a signed leased agreement, or other such dacumen�, %r the second user before they received the height bonus for co-location. If the applicant had a lease in hand, a letter of intent is not necessary. The oiher changes are minor and can be addressed during the Planning Commission meeting on December 18, 1996, if the Commissioners have any questions. N:IDATAIUSERSI.TIIvviE1SHAFZEITO WERMEM.PC 3 ,' �� - ; �- � ; 1 t ' i., ; , �, -_ J; ,� �t= °, �._ . .�. °� �: �� ' �� ., � . "�,� � ��, , �, ,�- �� :1 -� "�� 1 .'�� i + ' ' - --- i S'TA'I`� OF 1Vi��50'TA � I�SOI��T�ON I�CO NIiI�IG 'TO NIO�JIV�� 'i�1 CIi�� COIJI�1 AI30P'I`I�N OF �1�I�dAI�CE �TO. 5�8, .�1� OI�II�d�CE AP/IEI�Il�IG C �t 1�.26 OF i'�E �JI�tJNI)S �� N�1G- COI�� LA�TIl�G TO `T� I.,OCA�ON I� DESIGN i�F CO ERCiAI.. `6� I.ES� TEI..ECO ITI�ICATI01�1 �E�2Vi�ES �1D FAC� S WI'i`I3I�d C�'� O� �'IO S�W � WHEKEAS, the Mounds View City Council enacted a. moratorium on ihe new use, developmen� or construction of commercial wireless telecommunicatio�a services within the City of Mounds View ie� order to provide an oppartunity �or the study of this issue and the development of an ordinance to eegulate such services; arad, V�HEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has cor�ducted research, examined oedinances from other jurisdictions, and received inforrr►ation from industry representatives and the North �uburban Cable Commission regarding ttus issue; and, WHEREAS, the li�ounds View Pianning Commission has conducted a series of work sessions on September 18, October 23, December 4 and December 1�; and, WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the community, and a protection to heatth, safety and weifare for the City to enact regulations on the location and design of commercial wireiess telecommunication services and facilities. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RE50LVED that the Mounds View Planni�g Commission does hereby recommend adoption of Ordinance No. 588 as shown in E}cilibit "A" attached hereto and made a part of this resolution by tYiis reference. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission directs Staff to forward ihis resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the zninutes. Adopted this 18th day o�December, 1996 ATTEST: N:IDATA\USERS1JIIvIE\SHARE\TO WERPC.RES Jerry Peterson, Chairman Pamela Sheidon, Community Development Direc�o�° i ,- �, i � �" �. `�' � � ��; � � � ;1; _�. � .`""� � 1= '" �° = I � � �' � �>, .�, � � , . ,�_ ��. ��. :� ., ; ;. :: ,. .: �- �; �; : � � ` .� : . ,1� � �. �: ,-� �,� ,. �-,. , . f 1- . , -, ;; ;$ . . . ; i� ; n; �; - ;'.� .. ^'� i :/ I , . ; `�n <! ! . ,,1 • ; ... !� ... ; ; ; : f : `,,� _ . •. ; ', � ", , . ::, `� 1; ;. . ;�; � ... i i �., i. � , � � ' :�, `,,`. 'rHE CITY OF PviOUNDS VIEW ORDAINS: SECTION l: Chapter 1126 of ti�e Mounds View Zonin� Code is re-enacted to read as follows: 112b<O1: PU OSE: The ��i�ri ` re iation of commercial wiretess telecommunications services CWT� and facilities is iz�tended to rovide for the a ro riate location development and installation af telecommunications towers and antennae within the Citv of Maunds View "Cifi ". The rovisians of this Code are intended to rotect ti�e health safet and aesthetic concerns of the communitv b�r minimizin� the adverse visual ef%cis of towers and antennae throu�h careful desi�n, siting and screening; bv avoidin�potential dama e frorr� tower failure to adjacen�r��erties throu�h structural standards and setback requirements' and b maximizin� the use of existin�towers structures or buildin` s to accommodate new telecommunications antennae in the Citv. 1126.02: DE��T'ION�° The followin� words and terms for purnoses of this Cha t� er, � shall be defined as follows: <;;::>� :<�.:>�::>�:::»::::::< ::::::::::::::�::<::::::::::::;::�: <:;;;;; Subd. 1. ACCE550RY'; ��'��` �STRUCTURE' A bu��a�,c�r, �a��t�� ]tke strueture :;:�;:::;:>::<:..: ;::»::> :�>::;:�:::::=:««::<:::�:;::... . ..:.... > .> ::�:.::.::.;::::::<:.:..; ,.: :::.;:;.'>':...::,...::.:::>;:::.:.,...::;.:<:<:.::::,:.,.� :.:::::.::.:>::.,::.::.::,.;...... tocated ad a.��zi��:t�i'�<�d- .�k�� ut�m�diafi�I: : v��z�� o�' '` G� �� €�r:er €�r artte a� to c�use equipment customarilv incidentaE to the receivin� or transmitiin� of ��r��ss br�aadcasts cellular tel�hone calls voice messa�in�and pa�g, services. �ubd. 2. ANTENN S7°EALTH: CVdTS Antenna desi ed to blend into the surroundin environment or inte rated into the h sical siructure fio which ii is attac�ed. ,-.- � r (� � . / �� {� '„ ` ? 1 �� ; '�;� ,:. �: � i.; � _� . l.? „ , r ;� � � � ��`` � ��'� t� � iJ � �, } � , ,' , I 1 r--=l�,i1i ... , , , ;. .. ::...: ;;;_ ,;:: , ...... .;, a ; : ; .,- -- Ordinance 588 - Draft December 4, 1996 Page 2 Subd. 3, �N7`ENNA: E ui ment used for transmittin or receivin radio fre uertc si r�als which is attached to a tower_ building or o�her structure usualiy consis�in� of a series oi direcfional panels microwav� or satellite dishes,, or omnidirectional "whip" an#ennae, �ubd. 4. BASE TRANSCEIVER STATION: E ui ment that rovides the link betv►�een wireless coznmunications and land-based pubiic telet�hone switching networics,_ includin� radia frequency transceivers back-u�power sources, power amplifiers and si�nal processin� hardware fiypically,protected by a small buitdin�or cabinet. Subd. 5. CQ-LOCATION: The location of wireless communications„e�uipmeni from more than one provider on or�e common tower Subd. 6. C4�IMERCIAL V+TIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICES (CWTS)� Licensed wireless telecotnmunications service includin cellular di ital cellular ersonal communicafion services CS s ecialized mobile radio SMR enhanced s ecialized mobile radio fESMR), commercial t�a in� services and simiiar,services marketed or provided to the �eneral�ublic �u��::> i Subd. 8. TOWE LATTICE: Three- oc four-le��ed steel girdered structures ty ap•caII� supportin�multipie communications users and services generally ran`i�ng from 60 to 200 feet in height. 5ubd. 9. TOWER MONOPOLE• Single pole desi n a�proximatelv three feet in diameter at the base narrowin to a roximate! one and a haif feet at the to enerall ran in from 25 to 125 feet in height �u�.d;:>;>l , �� 1 � '•_ � � �: � I; � . . .� 1=� . i`-:,, � ''; � Subd. 1. Per°rnifted LTses A(1 Disiricts: CWTS towers and antennae shali be aElowed in an distric� as a ermitted use oni as rovided below: Ordinance 588 - Draft I)ecember 4, 1996 Page 3 a. � 'c< i ) a� t� `I.Lj`� �5,� ..'.-Q� `<.:'.;�.:>'3 � f��i-.x..... . ... c.. �. ' :.-_ the Cit�and paid all a�plica6le perrriit fees. ('n-Incaiion on �xistire�'To�verso CWTS antennae shali be ermitted to be obtained a buitdin emvt from the Ci and aid all a licable errr�it rees. accordance with the co-location re�uirements stated in 5ection i i�d.u4 sit�n requirements and desi� criteria stated in Section 1126 OS and the procedural re uirements stated in Section I 126.06. The rocedure for review and action on conditionaL use pernuts shall be as stated in Section 1125.01: � ' .. _..- , ..�. .. �. r � . ,: �o�ae�� l�st�cts :' ; ! �IesgFitLunifatwns : Wath Co-tosat�o�r __ . _.. R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4, R-5, R-O 10 feet above the height ofthe roof, . N/A {antensfae only) only if mounted on educational facilities, religious instiiuiions, government or public utiiity buildings; or in "upward tiu�usting architec[ural elements" such as church steeples, 6e1! towers or smokestacksj B-1, B-2 75 Feet 95 Feet � B-3, B-4, I-i i00 Feet I20 Feet Z CRP and PF 100 feet, allowed only if inco�poraeed into new or 120 Feet z etisting facitities or structures, such as using the tower as a light standacd for ball fields or parking areas, or into mature tree stands that provide a suitable screen for at least half the height of the tawer. t Im accordance with Sectiort 1126.05, Subd. 7 of this Code. Z Co-tocation height bonus subject to applicant providing to lhe City proof of a signed lease arrangement, shared use agreement, or other like document. ,, � , .._.._ : �� . .:: ... Ordinance 5 S 8- Draft December 4, 1996 Page 4 a. , e � . �' �_ � �.i �l' � � ':, .; ', ; ,t„ `�, , ::, , �� a.: Planned Unit Developments (PUDs�In commercial o�- industzial PUDs, CWTS iowers and antennae shall not exceed one hundred feet IOQ' in hei ht. The hei ht of a. tawer ma�be increased up io a maximum of one hundred and twen . feet 120' to allow for the co-Iocation of another rovider's antenna sub'ec� to the a Iicant rovidin to ihe Ci roaf of a si ned leasin arran ement shared use a�., reement, or other like document The an�Iicant shall file a rea��est tn arr,Pn�i +hA b. Conditional use perrnits are not required for towers and/or anterrnae used bv the Cit for Ci� u oses or ublic a encies for ublic safet u oses' or for re air or repiacement or adjustment of �he elements of a CWTS antenna array a�xed, to a tower, if the replacement does not reduce acceptable safety standards. _.. 1126o04e C'O-IlOCA��i�d �QLTIlZEli�ENT�. , ;; ,`; :` Subd. 1. A ro osal for a new CWTS tower or ar�tennae shall noi be a roved unless ihe a Iicant can document to the satisfaction of the Cit that the telecommunica#ions n,..,:.....,,...f ...1,.��_� r_ _ ..r_ _ . . . . munici al borders due to one or more of the followin ; � � Th� lanned e ui rrtent would exceed the structural ca acit of the existin or a roved tower or commercial buildin . The lanned e ui ment would cause inter%rence with other existin� or_planned equi�ment at ihe tower or building �> E�sting or a�proved towers and commercial buildin�s cannot reasonablX accommodate the planned equipment at a hei�ht necessary for ihe �roposed antenna to function '�:: � �� e y, �+ � s €.t:� . ' �) �4 G�i� C �E,� � 5�<f ��,,° 1T�'} ,.., ,�a,,�t. �� . , c � . � ,. , �,��. �� y� �9�-v F,.. . i ��,� e� �� {�� a �,� � �- _- � ; i Ordinance 588 a Draft December 4, 1996 Page 5 � �� .;� ;. i ��.��) ,,� �'� °d 2 3,��"' � �� v�_ i'<� . � .. � 1126005: ��'�G AI� IiESIGI�I �E UI�iVIEiV'TS: The re uirements of this section a l to all CVaTS tawers and antennae erected constructed iaced or re laced in the Cit . All CWTS:<�o�?e � and antennae shall be desi ned and situated tio be �"' J visuall unobtrusive to minitnize fihe im act u on the nei hborin uses and shall conform to the f�1t�w;n� desi�n and sifiin� criteria: �,�, � �-- ,,4`i, ti� � t;4 `�..' i, e �� ..` 1_. .:a�t:y::::p::i:S::t:::p� .:.5:::::;i::i:::::::::::ii:iii:= Subd. Z. Accessor��4utt�€�� r�� The Base Transceiver Siation (BTSI and all ot er related equi ment sha!! be housed in an existin buildin whenever ossible. if an existin `��° buildina is unavailable a new accessory equipment buildin� ma be constructed accordin ��t� ~b o UBC niform Building Code�ret�uirements and shali be of the same or better „ . . • , - --- --_____ .... ,. ...............�i �+.,,�t„rP nr ar�iacPnt hnilclin�s. I��hE' Subd. 3. Fencin : The CWTS antenna tower andlor accesso e ui ment struc�ure shail be surrounded with an ei�ht foot �8'Lall fence so as to prevent unauthorized ent and access to the e ui ment buildin or tower. Barbed wire razoc wire or electrified #'ences shall not be �errnitted. i: i: Ordinance 588 - Dc°aft December 4, I996 Page b Y��-�� , uG�f «cu �o mirumize vistbilrt and to blend into the surraundin environment. -- - -------- �_., . ;:>:;::.:;;<<>:::<:::;::;;:::::;::,>::<::»:<><::<_>:.:::<::;.:<:,;:::;:<:::� :>:<::>:;:.;:;<::.:;>:�:;;;;:;;;;>;; :::::. ::.:.::. :.::.::.,,.......................... const ;: :; : .: . : :.....:.. :. : ::: ..: .:.:.. .:.;:::: . ;�::::;:::. :;:;;. .; .::>- >;,:.;:<:.::::::::::>::>::;:<>:::::::<:::: «:> :::<:;::;<:::::;::::;::»: ruct�on �nles� a:�ara��e:fs ant�d t�: .: �t��:�.��rd :aY t�� us�r��nt ��td.;� �:t�>: Gu - _ _ _ _ wired towers shall not be ermitted. Metat towers shatl be constructed of or treated with corrosive resistant materials Subd. i. Roof mounted CWTS Antennae: Roof-mounted CWTS anteruiae shall not be ermi�ted on huildin s with itched-roofs unless inca orated into u ward thrustin architectural ..�_-------- - , , . . . point of the rooFto which the antenna is attached Subd. 8. Preven#ion of Radiation: CWTS antennae shall be sub'eci to state and federal re lations re ardin non�ionizin radiation and other health hazards related �o such facilities. If ihe federa! overnment ado ts new more restrictive standards the antennae shail be made to com�l ��or the antenna may be removed by the City at the tower owner's ex ense. The owner or o erator of the iower shall a an associated costs of com liance verification. Subd. 9, Li hts: IVo CWTS tower or antenna sha11 have afiixed or attached to it in an wa exce t durin� time of're�air or installation any�hts,., reflectors, flashers, day tin3e strobes or stead ni ht tim� li�ht or other itlumination devices except as re uiq �red by the Federal r:';` .:: , ;, ; ; ,. ,: : , :;:. ... . _ `I Ordinance 588 - Draft December 4, 1996 Page 7 Subd. 10. Si ns and Advertiisin : The use of an ortion oi a tower for si ns or advertisin other tl�an req_uired warnin� si�ns shall be �rohibited. Subd. 12. Interference with Public Safet Telecommunicatians: No new or existin telecommunications service shali interfere with ublic safet telecommunications. , � � � � � �. �� F�: � �: B rJi d. Sufiicier►t information io shaw thai construction installation and maintenance of the��;''. <::�>:� `'w��:��i��l'`..:>�'eri �'� will not create a safet hazard or dama e to the property of other persons. e. A re ort and 1an from a ualified and re �stered en ineer or firm that s ecifies and includes the followin : 1. The tower hei ht and desi n includin a cross secYion and elevation. .,= ~ ;�' �'r � 1� �� '""�'.. � ,.. ,., ,.. _ , ,; ,. --- _: ,. .__.:.. -.::, , ;. , Ordinance 588 - Draf� December 4, 1996 Page 8 2. 3. 4. 5_ The hei hi above rade for all otentiat mouniin ositions for co-located antennae and the minimum separation distances between antennae The ea acit of the tower including the number and type of antennae that the tower can accotnmodate. The ste s that the a�plicant will take to avoid interf�renc� with established ubiic safet telecommunications, w� An en ineer's stam and re istration number ;: ,<. :;.:; :::.> : .::. : :.:: :. . .:::.;:::: ,:::: ; . ..:. .:. .::: ..... ::. ..... <::.:.;.::::.::::«:::>:-> ::::.:.:�:«<:>;:::::::>::>:;::<::: :»>:::_:<:> ::;..:.:;:;;,.::..:.:.;;:;.;:,.�,::::,:. �:: :.,.:::::. ..:., .. ::...::.::.,.: :.:: ::::. ;: . :. . .. .::: . ... . ,. : . :,. :.: . . . . :.. :...:.. :.: :.,:.. :..; :: .�>:<.;: � ::: .., .;...:: .::: �, �:.::: � «»:>�<:«;=:: _»� ::<::>;> ::;: :> ;,::.;: «<.;::,::.;:: � ��:«::��: : . .�::. : �:: . : r � <::::��:> . . :. r:t��.�e:<� �::. �'': . : � : :::: ::: > : �;: < ::::. �: : : -: :_: � _:: : � .;: ....,;:: ;;; :<::: > <;: . .... ......................................... ......... t� .� 1 �6, t� ,: � . .;:�::.: ,�.t�F >: :: .. . ;: . An other information necessa for the Ci to evaluate the CUP. Subd. 3. D�rrionstra�ron of Need: The a licant shall demonstrate b roviain a Ci -wide �� 0,�.,� covera e/interference and capacit analysis that the location of the proposed CW'I'S �}.��,'� tower and/or antenna is necessar�to meet the frequencv re-use and spacing needs ofthe �..� ;y wireless s stem and to provide adequate coverage and capaciiy to areas,that cannot be - :.._ ��ion„�¢ot„ ..�....,.a i... �---b�__ �,_ _ . . . � � � a a � �j ,� �' � } : % � °k� ii \ � ,��1 .,�� -: i� t �`�,� �� " � �3�� ]f �' . _ � � �., < <: � � \�?± ! :. 3�.i t {;:, i i �c . 1 ':, � � i ; : ; ,: Ordinance 588 - Draft December 4, 1996 Page 9 ;:>:<, :::::r<:�:::s<�::::::>�<,:;:;; �:<:<:><;::>::;:,::;::<::<:.:::_.<�::<: � ::<;;::::<..::;;��;>::�<::«:::::«;:<.:,:.<.:><..<:>�:�.:...<; �t�t:::th�::: rn � a�te�;a�'�he-::tar�et�::sai�> 1�26.07: E��S"I'II�G ��'� �N'�� T��ERS: CWTS antenna� and iowers � in existence as of the date of enac�ment of this ordin�nce ihat do not meet or com�.ly wiih tche.�rovisions of this Cha�ter are sub�ec� to the foliowin�: Subd. 1. Extstin �ovvers ma continue in use for their existin u ose but ma not be re laced or structurall aitered to an exfient exceedin ien ercent 10% of the tower's fair market va�ue, as determined by the City without rneetin ali standards in this Chapter._ Subd. 2. If such tower is damaged or destroyed to the extent of fifty,percent 50%1 or more of its fair market vaiue said value to be detemuned b the Ci due to an reason ar cause whatsoever the owner oi the tower ma choose ta rebuild or rernove the tower. Tf th� owner chooses to rebuild the tower it shall from and after the date o£ said destruction be sub'ect to a11 current and a licable re lations as s ecified b this Code. If a tower is dama�ed to an e�ent of less than fifty�ercent (5Q%�of its fair maricet value, the tower owner shall have one vear in which to obtain a buildin�pernut from the Cit�+ and to repair _ . . .... . , - - -_ � _L__....,,.� �� -�. �z.. 1V1 Vuv i vu. .,.,.�.. „_ �___'__ _. __ _ _ +...x�P,- an�i/r,r antennae in the same manner and ursuant to the same rocedures as for tiY i N� 1"'�. 1 t` ,:. ?A' { , i.;; '. � � E.: SECTION 2. Section 1112.04 of the Maunds View �oriing Code relating to conditional uses in the B�1 zoning district is amended to add Subdivision 5 to read as follows: Subd. 5. Commercia{ wireless teiecommunications tawers and antennae sub'ect to the rovisions ; estabjished in Cha�ter 112b of the Zonin�, Code. j`.: I � ':.': .._ . .. .. .... . ..-. . . . .. ... .. . _ , ., _.�_ , :,.. . :._.. ,..:. . .. . . . . .:�'. . . ' '_" . :... �. . .... -" '_. ... .. Ordinance 5�� Draft December 4, I996 Page 10 SECTION 3. Section 11 i 3.04 of the Mounds View Zoning Code re�ating to conditional uses in the B-2 zorung district is amended to add 5ubdivision 6, to read as %ilows: �ubd. 6. Commercial wireless tetecommunications towers and antennae sub°ect to the rovisions established in Cha ter 1 I26 oithe Zonin Code. SECTION 4. Section 1114.04 of the Mounds View Zonin�; Code relating to conditional uses in the Bs3 zo�zng district is amended to add Subdivision 8, to read as follows: Subd. �. Commercial wireless telecommunications towers and antennae sub'ecfi to the ravisions established in Cha ter 1126 oFthe Zonin Code. SECTION 5. Section 1115.04 of the Mounds View Zoning Code relating to conditional uses in the B-4 zoning district is amended to add Subdivision 6, to read as follows: Subd. b. Commercial wireless telecommunications towers and aniennae sub'ect to the rovisions established in Chapter 1126 of the,Zoning Code. SECTION 6. Section 1116.04 of the Mounds View Zoning Code relating to conditional uses in the I-1 zoriing district is amended to add Subdivision 22, to read as follows: Subd. 21. Commerciai wireless teEecommunications towers and antennae sub'ect to the provisions established in Cha tep r 1126 of the Zonin� Coder SECTION 7. Chapter 1117 of the Mounds View Zoning Code pertaining to the Conservancy, ::<,,,;:.:: ecreation and Preservation CR�' District is amended by addin new sections 1117.04<' �_''' (....:. ....) :........::............. g .and s. :.:;:: :.: . ,,: :.,.,;.::::::..:�:;<.::� :..:.:::.::>;.:. :# .: :..;.... : :. .:.,., ... `�:::��':��>7:4:5�:':t:```:":``:;;:";`:;;`.':;=;:`;": ..� « ::. �.::: .. ;. ��sp��v�. � entitled ;.;��ES�C?I�'�'' �`��.;; and CONDTTIONAL USES" reiating to commercial wireless telecommunication towers and antennae, to read as folIows: :: ;.:. .;: .; : : :.:::.;:: ; ^! `+��:j:.:..:. :.:{.�:.,,q.� <>:�<.:::.;<.::;:._«.::::><'g:g«<::;;:.>::^.�>:.:;'g;;:!;�.g>:,5.;��.7;>::;:�::::.;;::;;;:.;:7� y:�:<::>:>::.�»:<:>::::::::.:::<.;,,.;:-.;:::;:.::.�.::.:::::::::...�::....................... . :,F!,,`�' �6.��.�$.��:�':Ti71.8�r7"s.>��P..:��1�1�1'71�Ff1:T1:iJ'.C�'1��::�'St�'2'7tiristiri�r��i:+ar�__.s'.,v:�'.i::�:;i:::i:'�"�_::_;_:;�::; . .: ..�' .:� ._._. .. '_ " '.-_ .'..' � ". OPdii1�.T1Ce Jgg - DiSft ,, I3ecember 4, 1996 Page 11 1117.05 CO�I'�'ION�1L �TS�� "��e followi❑ sl�all be considered a conditional use in the CIZP Disirici (requirin a conditional use �ermii based upo�rocedures set forth in and re lated b Section 1125.�1 of this Title : Subd. 1. Commercial wireiess teiecommunications towers and antennae sub'ect to the rovisions established in Cha fier 1126 of the Zonin Code. �ECTION �. Chapier 1118 of the 1Vlounds �liew Zoning Cod�, pertai�in� to,the Puhlic Facilities i frict is amended b addin� new sections 1118.03 '�iid;::l;:�<�;�<:!�'�;:::�;��I��?�$��: ��titled iPF).�..5 ....::.:.:::::::...::.:�::::::::,:.:.: y .. ... ii:; .:��'��p�;'�:��" and "CONDITIONAL USE�" relating to comcnercial wire ess telecommunication towers and antennae, to read as follows: 1118.04 COI�IiI4I�iAI� USE�: The followin shall be considered a conditianal use in the PF Distnct re uirin a condiYional use ermit based u on rocedures set fortt� in and re lated b Section 1125.01 of this Title : Subd. I. Commercial wireless telecommunications towers and antennae sub'ect to the rovisions established in Chauter 1126 of the Zoning Code. �ECTION 9. Chapter I106.04 related to conditional uses in the R-i district is hereby amended to add Subd. 8 as follows: Subd. 6. Commercial wireless telecommunications towers and antennae sub�ect to the rovisiot�s esiabGshed in Cha,�ter 1 l26 of the Zonin� Code. Ordinance 588 - Draft December 4, 1996 Page 12 SECTION I0. Chapter I 110.04 celated to condiiionaI uses in the R-5 district is hereby amended to add Subd. 10 as follows: Subd. 10. Commercial wireiess telecommunications towers and anfennae sub'ect to the rovisions established in Cha ter i 126 of the Zonin Code. SECTION 11. EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordirtance goes into effect after th� City Cauncil a�proves it and 30 days after its publication in the afiicial City newspaper. Read by the City Council of the City of �/Iounds Vi�w on , 1 gg7 Read and passed by the City Council of the City o�Mounds 'View on this day of __ , I997. Duane �IcCarty, Mayor ATTEST: Charles Whiiing, City Clerk—Administrator (SEAL) APPRO VED TO AS F�RM: City Attomey n:ldat aluserslj imelshareltower. ord <: : _. .. Item #8 � �.. �; ;� 1�/ � � To: Mounds View Planning Commission From: James Ericson, Planning Associate Subject: Commercial Wireless Telecommunications Towers and Antennae Planning Case No. SP-001-96 Date: l�dovemher 27, 1996 Meeting of December 4, 1996 Issue On August 12, 1996, the City Council approved a six monih (180 day} moratorium on the new use, development or construction of wireless telecammunicafions services (Ordinance No. 587) within the City. This mocatoriutn is set to expire on March 8, 1997. The 1'lanning Commission \',� held a special session on October 23, 1996 to discuss this topic at whieh tneeting industry representatives were present to give short presentations and to answer ques�ions. Recommendation StafF recommends that the Planning Commission review the attached draft of the Commercia# Wireless Telecommunications Towers and Antennae ordinance and make suggestions and or comments as to its content and provisions. In addition, staff has provided a shor� summary of the ordinance which answers the Iist of questions developed by staff for your September I2, 1996 meeting (list attached.) Analvsis Because there is c�arrently a moratorium in effect, some e�ra thought needs to be given to the process and time frame by which tYus ordinance gets approved. If approval of'this proposed ordinance (or some later 'steration) is desired prior to the expiration of the moratorium, sta�will need to draft a separate resolutior� to repeal the moratorium. I� the prevailing thought is to let the moratorium expire on its own accord (March 8, 1997), the proposed ordi�ance to replace it must be timed so it is approved by the City Cauncil no later than the second Nlonday in January (7anuary 13, 1997). This will allow sufficient time for the adopied ordinance to be published in fhe r�ewspaper and the required 30 day period before the ordinance is effective. P�3f3.�1II� COITITII1SSlOI1 P1ar►ning Case No. SP-001�96: November 27, 1996 1°age 2 Summarv Wireless Telecommunications Towers and Antennae i ` (The numbers before eacl� staiement correspond io the numbered questzons in ihe aitached Iist.) 1. I�efinitions: The %tlor�vin� words azid terms were chosen to be defined because of their inclusion within the text of the of-dinance: �iccessory sirucPure; An�errna, ielecomrriufzications; Base transceiver siation; Co-loccation; Comrnercial wireless telecommunications services; Tower, datlice; Tower, mor�apode; Arrtenna, stealth; Tower, teleco�rmunrcatiorts . Refer to the proposed ordinance for the corresponding definitions to these words. 2. Antennae permitted as us� by right: As proposed, only antennae lacating on the water tower and anteruiae co-iocating on e�sting towers are allowecE as permitted uses, If an accessary buiiding is reyuired for the water tower site, fihe Zoning Code will need to be amended to a11ow such buildings since the water iower is in ihe PF district and this districi onIy allows public facilities. We would suggest that accessory buildir►gs associated with a telecommunications antenna be aIlowed with approvaI oi a conditionat use permit. Towers are not permitted in residential districts. Roof-mounted anterinae are alIowed in residential districts as a conditional use i� locaied on a schvot, church, government or pubtic utility building (see chari below). Antennae and towers are ailowed with approval of a CUP as follows: R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4, R-S, R-O (antennae only) : C B-3, B-4, I-], CRP* and PF'� 2Q Feet, oniy as roof-mounted on school, church, government or pubfic utility buildings; or in "upward thrusting architectucal efements" snch as church steeptes 75 Feet I00 Feet N/A 95 Feet 120 Feet *Towers znust meet higher stancfards of landscaping and screening in th� CRP and PF Districts. 4. Co-location is recommended whenever possible, but not required. Applicants must show that any new antenna cannot be accommodated on an existing tower. Applicants providing far co-location of an additional anteruia would receive a height bonus of 20 feet. 5. Appiicants are not required to provide space on proposed towers in speculation of fiature co-loc�iors, if costs of doing so are overiy prohibitive. '� i:::_. _ . _. . . i Planning Commissioct Planning Case No. SP-001-96 November 27, 1996 Page 3 6. 7. 8. 9. 1 Q. ll, 12. 13, 14, 15 16 17 Wireless Telecommunications iowers and Antennae Sethacks: Towers musi be located aw�y from all property lines and public right of ways a d�stance equal to the height of the tower plus five feet. Towers must be lacated in the rear yard if it is an accessory to a principal structure. Pcoposed cade does not require siting or� City-owned properties. Antenna tower shail not be.lighted (except as may be required by FAA). Antenna tower shall not display any signs or advertising. The tower and antenna shali be painted a neuiral color, such as grey-tones or light blue. Monopoies are required unless, at its discretion, the City Council decides otherwise. Accessory buiidings are permitted. Accessory buildings shall tnatch or be campatible with the architecture, style anc! appearance oi the principai or surrounding structures. Landscaping is required to the satisfaciion of the Planning Corrimisszon and City Council. An eighi foot fence is required Yo surround the iower and accessory building. Height limits vary by zone. See #3 above for heights provision. A twenty foot bonus is given to encaurage co-location in all districts bui R�1 and IZ-2. 18. Non-conformir�g existing towers shall be allowed to continue, but cannot be replaced ar structuraliy altered without meeting the provisions of tihis ordinance, unless repair or replacement is a resutt of damage ta tower. (�ee Section 1123.07 of the Ciry Code relating to non-con£ornung buildings, structures and uses.) 19 20 21 22 Qwners of towers in violation of this code can be charged with a misdemeanor; ciiations can be issued. Tower owners are required to remove obsolete oc unused towers within one year. The applicant shall provide proof that the tower will not disrupt or interfere wit4� other wireless communications. Applicants are required to provide proof af need and an inabili�y to use existin� towers or structures before a new iower proposal will be approved. l Mounds View Planning Commission SP-OQ 1�96: Telecommunications Towers and Antennas Page 2 September 12, 199b Defanitio�rs 1. VJhat terms need to be defined? Location; Type of Use 2. Where should towers and antennas be aIlowed? Which zoning districts? 3• Should they be listed as allowed or conditionai uses? 4- 5hould the Cii}r r�quire coolocaiian oi equipment on a limited number af to�wers? 5. Should applicants be required to provide room on fiheir tower fbr oiher companies' equipment? 6. Should the Ciiy specify where on the proper�y the tower m�ast be [ocated? 7. Whai should the setback requirements be? g. Should the City specify ihat the tower must go on a municipal sife, owned by the City? Lrghting/Signage/Color/Design/Larrdscaping � Screening 9. What allowance or [imits should be put on lighting a tower? ID• Whai allowance or iimits should be put on signage on a tawer? 1 I. Should the City speciiy the color{s} allowed to be used for the �ower? 12. Should the City specify the type of tower? ViThat tower design is permitted? �i i 3. Should separate accessory buildings be permiited? - I4- What design standards should be established %r accessory buildings7 1 S. What iandscaping and/or screening requirements should be estab�ished? HeTght Limits I6. �,Vhat should the height Iimit be? 17. Shouid a bonus be given for towers holding two or more companies' equipment? � Miscellaneous � IS• What provisions should be rr�ade for non-confomung towers? 19. Should specifc provisions for abatir�g towers in violation of the Code be staied? 20. Shoutd the City require removai of obsalete or unused towers? What time limit should be used? 21. Should the City require documentation that emissions from thes� antennas will not affect other wire(ess comrnunicafiions? 22_ Shouid the City require proof af need? search for altemative sites based on certain criteria? ?. ; , .. . . :,. . ; - . : ,_: - ; � '. 1? 'J � � � �: : -_ • �, �,; ._ ;�. .. �. �.: f� ' � i t '� `� �. .; ;1, � �. . �: �` , . , ,` ' �, � : ;: ;1` �� ' � 1"� , � 'l •. : ; : ,1., �;� • �; , � ; � � f. � ;�. . � �. �, , � 1 ; 1_ ; �1: � �_._ � � �, � �. ;�: . �,. � �� . ��; �.. - �; � �:� ��:. THE CITY OF MOLINDS 'VIEW ORDAINS: �ECTI�I�t l: Chapi�r 1126 of the Ivlounds View Zoning Code is re-enacted to read as follows: 1126.01: PU��SE° The re iation of commercial wireless telecommunications services (CWTS) and facilities is intended to provide for the appropria�e iocation: develo�ment and installation of ietecommunications towers and antennae within the Cit}r of Mounds View ("Ci�") Th.e provisions of this Code are intended to protect the health�safe and aestheiic concerns of'the communit b minimizin the adverse visual ei%cts of towers and antennae thraugh careful design�sitin�and screening' b,�o,idin�potential dama�e to adjacent �roperties from tower failure through structural standards and setback reQUirements; and bv ma�mizin� the use of existing towers, structures or buildin�Ls to accoznmodate new telecommunications antennae in the Citv. 1125.02: I3EI+�II'TIOIV�° The following words and terrns wherever they are used in t1�is � Cha�ter shail be defined as follows: Subd. l. ACCESSORY STRUCTURE: A structure located on the tower or antenna site usuall for e ui ment customaril incidentai to the receivin or transmittin of radio or television broadcasts cellular telephone calls, voice messa�in� and ba�in� services. _ Subd. 2. ANTENN STEALTH: Antenna desi ned to blend into ihe s�arroundin environment or inte�rated into the�hvsical structure to which it is attached. Subd. 3. ANTENNA, TELECOI��IMMUN�CATIONS: Equipment used for transmittin� or i ,,. ?. ,: :;, . , , Di(�1I1c111Ce 5�� - DI'd� December 4, 1996 Page 2 receivin teleco�ununication teIevision or radio si nals which is attached to a tower buildin or other strncture usualiv consisting of a series of directionai panels, microwave ; or sateitite dishes or omnidirectional "whi " antennae. � ;, Sub �3T. BASE TRANSCEIVER STATION: E ui ment ihat rovides the link between wireless comrriunications and land�based ublic tele hone switchin r�etworks includin radio ire uenc transceivers back-u ower sources ower am lifiers and si naI rocassin hardware, tXpically protected by a srr►all building or equipment cabinet. i� ; � �Su�d.`�t_ CO-LOCATTON: The location of wiraless communications e ui ment from more ihan one rovider on one common site � ' COMNfERCIAL WI�tELESS TELECOI��MUI�TICATIQNS SERVICES CWTS : „a .,,,.et,�,.,. «,.�,._--------- - . . . . . ersor�al communication services CS s ecialized mobile radio SMR en}lanced speciatized mobile radio1ESMR commercial pa�ing services and simiiar services tnarketed to the general ublic, �� °�� ubd. {, TQWE LATTICE: Three- or four-le ed steel irdered structures icali su � ortin multi le communicatians users and services enerall ran in from 60 to 240 .r� feet in height Suba.;'�, TOV�E MONOPQLE: Sin le o1e desi n a roximatei three feet in diameter at the base narrowin to a roximatel one and a half feet at the to enerall ran in from 25 to 125 feet in hei ht. ij� 94 Subd.��. T�WE TELECO1VIli�iUNICATIONS: An round-mounted ole s ire strueture or combination thereof inciudin su ortin lines cables wires braces and masts, foe the nurnose of mountin a tetecommunications antenna 1126.03: ALLOWA,I�CE I+'Olt TO�'EIdS t$�31�l�TEI�Tr�E B�' ZONI�TG I3IS'T1�ICT: Subd. 1. P�a°m�tted �7s�s r�16 I)estrie��: CWTS towers and antennae sha11 be allowed in an district as a ermitted use sub'ect to the followin onl as rovided below: a. �Vater Tow�r: Antennae sha11 be ermitted u on Cit mowned water towers rovided the a Iican� has an a roved lease a reement with the Cii has a lied for and received a buildin ermit from the Cit and has aid aii a licable ertnit fees. If the a licant ; 4rdinance 5 S � � Draft December 4, 1996 Page 3 pro�oses to construct an accesso buildin�to house an_._y necessary e uipment, ap I°i�cation m�st be made for a conditiortal use �ermit Accessory buildin s are condiiionai uses in the Public Facilities PF and the Conservanc Recreation and Preservation C� Districts. b. Co-tocation or� E�istire Tmwers: Antennae shalI be emvtted to be attached to • • ... .. .-. . • � - - - --�---- ---.bt bL,. ...,....1:,...1.1., ..:+:.,.� �,.,.:.amlinme �r the �ower owner or lessor and obtaining a buildin��ermit from the City and .�a��Lthe necessary fees. Subd 2 Corediii�n�l �1ses, �pecific D'es�rYCts• CTWS towers and antennae for the followin� zoning districts are ailowed with the approval of a conditional use perrnit and in accordance with the co-iocation re uirements stated in 5ecfcion 1126.04 sitin rec�uirements and desi�n criteria stated in �ection 1126.05 and the procedural re�uirements stated in Section 112b 06 The procedure �or review and action on conditional use �ermits shall be as stated in Section l I25.0I. a. In Ral R-2 R-3 R-4 R-5 and R-O Districts: � Roof mounted CTWS antennae rr�oun�ed on religious insiitutions, educationat facilities and overnrnent or ublic utilit buildin s in accordance with Section 1126.05 Subd. 7' hei ht shail noi exceed ten feet 10' . �2,� CTWS antennas concealed within u�ward thrustin� architectural com�onents such as a church steepie spire or bell-tower smokestack, etc� height to conform to architectural element. � Towers and antennas ott structures other than those enurnerated in Section 112b 03 Subd 2 a( I) above are not �ermitted in these districts. b. Tn B-1 and B-2 Districts CWTS towers and antennae shall not exceed seven - five feet 75'1 in hei�ht The hei h� t mav be increased u�to a maximum of ninety- five feet (95'1 if the ap�licant can demonstrate to the Cit�,ihat the eYtra height is necessa for the co-�tocation of another rovider's antenna. c, In B-3 B-4 and I-1 Disiricts CWTS towers and antennae shall not exceed one hundred feet �.10�'�in hei�ht The height of a tower may be increased up to a maximum of one hundred and twentv feefi (120' if the applicant can demonstrate to the Cit that the extra hei�ht is necessar�,for the co-location of another , �f / . �� `k ��,�,,�,��:�� '�� ' i a �F � �i, � X= ��, � 3 �� 1: > ' � ',�': � � i'�"? �, � �� f_: , �;�� ., � ,` , � �. � ,, � �' �'� �, , :,;��„ �.! �. � � r1 i� tin I Ordinance 588 - Draft December 4, 1996 Page 4 r�1 f � �(. .�_ � r, y_[!.j�r °_ �7. �...y �, ! �.y�,�.� _�i I ��i��.F`'�C�ciiYl ' . ,v provider's antenna d. In CRP and PF Districts CWTS towers and antennae shall not exceed one hundred feet 100' in hei ht. 'The hei ht of a tower ma be increased u to a maximum of one hundred and h�vent �eee 120' if the a iicant can demonstrate to the Cit that the ex#ra hei ht is necessa for the co-location of another rovider's antenna. In addition the followin re uirements shall be met: �1 In order to rotect - reserve and enhance the natural fea�ures and environmental value oithe Ci 's arks and recreation areas for the a reciation and use of the commurut�,, the highest standards of landsca in and screenin of CWTS towers antennae and accesso builciin�s shall be utilized to the satisfaction of the Citv Council �2,� The a�plicant shall incorporate the nroposed CWTS towers into new or ex2st�n facil�ties or structures such as usin the #ower as a li ht standard �.,._..___.�,....: a�� for ball fietds or t�arking areas or into tree sfiands similar in hei ng t to that of ihe tower. ' e. Planned Unii Develo�ments �,_UDs • In commercial or industrial PLIDs, CWTS towers and antennae shali not exceed one hundred feet 100' in hei h�. The hei ht of a tower ma be increaserl u to a m��mum oi one hundred and twen feei i 24' if the a licant can demonstrate to the City that the extra hei�ht is necessarv for the co-location of another provider's an#enna , The applicant„shall file a request to amend the existin PUD final tan and/or ado ted condi�ional use ermit in accordance with Chapter 1120 and Section 1125 O1 of this Code. CWTS towers � and antennae shail not be allawed m residential or mixed use PUDs. R, k; ;,_�, �, <..; �. ��... ,'s. .::� . �...., • , �, - 2�._ ,, � ��.. �� r,: p �..�. �r anienna ix tne re iacement does not reduce acce table safet standards• and antennae mounted on water towers and existin ower ii ht or teIe hone oles. __.. ..... -._. F a 2,;; ti� rs f' Ii26.a�o �o-�,oc��o�t ��r��s� _ � � � ,, , � �, �- i � } {I � Fx>. � L 52 , � :..� i : Subd. 1. Leiter of Intent: For all new CWTS towers erected in the Cit after the date of t::j. ' f" -�1-�� enactment of this ordinance a letter of inter�t shall be re uired that commits the tower the �-c- �� ',`� �; owner and the owner's successors �o allow the shared use of tihe tower if an addiiional �;,,�:.;,� ::�:.§ user a rees in writin to meet reasonable fierms and conditions for shared use. �.�, ��__, � � � E � �; �� " _�, ��..._._.. ...__... ..,.__: . A ,....:..:. A�.�.. r ... _ ,_ _. ,,..._ __ _ __. ... . . . . _ . ` ^ �,. t . I � �. ,�^ / �U l �(`� 4 [/r . g _ �� u ""�� r e� t°_ �;, . '�" �' �t) �� s � � ,. �' � �� , � d- �;1 R J �'�'� ;; ;, Ordir�ance 588 - Drafi I?ecember 4, 1996 Page 5 Subd. 2. A proposal for a new C'RITS tower or antennae shall not be a�proved unless ihe a iicant can document to the satisfaction of the Cit Council Yhat the telecommunications equi�ment �.anned for the �ro�osed tower caruiot be accommodated on an e�sting or a roved tower or commercial buitdin within a one-tzalf mile radius teanscendin munici�al borders, due to one or more of the followin�: Subd -1.�The 1�lanned e�c ui�nneni wouid exceed the stnictural ca�acity_of the e�cisting or apg�rovedf ^ tower or commercial buildin . ��> Subd. 2. The,�lanned equipment would cause interference with other existin or lanned �' e ui ment at the towec or buildin . _ __. �, -_. Subd�: 3.. lE�stin� or a�proved towers and commercial buildin s within a one-half m�le ra sus cannot reasonab( accommodate the Ianned e ui ment at a hei ht necessa for the proposed antenna to function. 1126.05: SI'I'IN� A�i DE�IGN itE �T IVIEN�'�= The re uirements of . . , ._ -•-� --�---, advertisin or si na e of an t e exce t as re uired b overnnnent re lation. E ui ment buildings housing the Base Transceiver Siation ^TS�must conform witf� the �uidelines pertainin� to accessorv buildin�s as_outiined in this Chapter of the Cade and bXzonin� district and shali be of the same or better construction and desi n as the rinci al structure or surroundin buiIdin�s. All CWTS towers and antennae shall confocm to the following desi,�n and sitin criteria: � � l? ~6 �',�' � ,,�' � ��_., �`� �. ,_� % ;� �� 5ubd. 1. Setbacks: The nvnimum setback from an�pro�erty line or public ri ht-of-wa fQr an antenna fower is Yhe hei ht of the antenna tower lus an additional five feet 5' and shall be located onl,y in the rear vard if incidental or subordinate to a princinal use. Subd. 2. Accesso Buildin s: Transmittin receivin and switchin e ui mer�t shall be housed in an exis#in� structure whenever possible If a new equivment buildin� is necessary, it shall be of the same or better construction desi n and a earance as the rinci al structure or surroundin buildin s so as to minimize the im act u an the nei hborin uses. The tower/antenna and e�ui�ment buildin� shall be landscaped anci screened and surrounded with an ei ht foot S` tali fence so as to revent unauthorized ent and access to �he e ui ment buildin or anfenna. Barbed wire razor wire or electrified fences shall not be ermitted. S i t ��.� � ��,. ° .,'�� ,,�� 6:, � �P(�II1c�t1C� S�� - ni1"a�} December 4, 1996 Page 6 Subd. 3. Color: The tower and antenna sha11 be ainted a neutral color such as Ii ht e or s blue exce t as dictated b the Federal Aviation Administration A.A and be desi ned to minimize visibilit and to blend into the surroundin environment. �,�:. �_� Subd. 4. Cons�rtic�ion Type and Materials• The antenna tow� a�hail be� of a monopole construcfiion unless the Cit Council at its discretion a� roves oiherwise. Gu wired towers si�aIl not be ermitted. Metal towers shall be constructed of or treated with corrosive resistant maierials Subd. 5, I�oof-mourited Anteruiae: I�aof-mounted antennae shall not be ermitted on buildin s with niiched-roofs. unless incorporated into upward thrtistin� architectural components, ----L — - -� , . , . . .. struchzre to which the antenna is attached �-� ""� �,��. � �,:� ��'" Subd. 6. Prevention of Radiation: Antennae shali be sub'ect to siate and federaI re lations re ardin non-ionizin radiation and other health hazards related to such facilities. If the federal �overnment adopts new more restrictive standards, the antiennae shall be made to cam 1 or o erations may be restricted b tY he Citv Council The cost of verification of com liance shali be aid b the owner or o erator of the tower. ...^---�.,., Subd. 8. Signs and Advsrtising: The use of any portion of a tower for signs or advertisin�, other than required warnin� si�ris shall be prahibited �� d�.�- '��(,� �-,�-„e.� � 5ubd. � . . ,. . _ ... - - — ! °� >. �� 3 ��..._ ora��Ce sss - rhaft December 4, 1996 Page 7 ,.�,,_ ,.� , .:, .;�;,. - r�� ;��t �.� �� r� ,..� �� e � � , � � ` � �:� ,:.. � � �,� �_, -, Subd. 1. Derreonsiratao�t oi l�eed: The a licant shall demonstrate b ravidin a Ci -wide covera e/interference and ca aci anal sis thai the location o�the ro osed towec and/or antenna is necessary to meet the fre4uenc,y re-use and �acin needs of the wireless svstem and to pcovide ade uat� coveragg and ca�acity to areas that cannot be ade uatel served b locatin the antenna on an existin structure. �� P � ��'��'�,��;��_�. Subd. 2. �uiia�iex Pe�°rn�ts= A1i towers and antennae must obtain a buildin ermit and are sub�ect to ins eciion b the Ci buildin official to determine com liance with LTBC constructior� standards. The a�plicant shall rovide at the time o�' application. su�'icieni i►�'ormation to sho�v that construcYion insiallation and maintenance o� the antenna and tower will not create a safet hazard or dama e to the ro e of other ersons. The buildin� vermit at� lication must include a re ori and�lan from a qualified and re�istered en�ineer or firm that s�ecifies and includes the followin�: a. The tower height and desi n includin a cross section and elevation. b. The hei ht above ade �or all otential mountin ositions for co-Ioeated antenna.e and the minimum se aration distances beiween anter�ziae. c. The ca�aacit of the towee, includin. the number and type of antennae #hat the tower can accommoda#e. d. The steps that the ap�Iicant will take to avoid interference with estabEished t�ublic_ safet telecommunications. e. An en�ineer's stam� and reQ-istration number. f. An,y other information necessary for the Cit�to evaluate ihe re�uest._ Subd. 3. Pt°oof of In�ur°a�c�e The a licant shall rovide the Cit with a co of the insurance olic which rotects the residents and ro e owners from ersonal in°u or ro ert dama e and holds harmless the Ci from an and all ciaims resultin from the ct�nstruction oc coll�se of the tower antennae or accessorv eQUipment. Subd. 4. Violations: Deviations from the a roved construction plans is a cnisdemeanor. � " ;f° �,: . � �'` ,,. , �'/ � ,.. f,..� f t,.:,:� 5 /`... - / 1 .. f � : y_.. �-� �. I�-�: •.. � ,,� �� l r,�� :�� x'� _ ��.�� ( N�M!�� /1r1.12 ' F::i 4" r, - [� � t)`�i�, g'n l} r«:§8 7 � Ordinance 58� � Draft December 4, 1996 Page 8 1126007: EXIS�TG AI�Ti'��NI�dAE A�I2 T'O`WE12S: Antennae and towers in existence as of the daie of enactment of this ordinance that do not meet or com I with the provisions of this Cha�ter are subject to the followin�. Subd. 1. Existin Towers ma continue in use for their existin u ose but ma noi be re laced or structurall altered to an e�ent exceedin ien ercent 10% of the tower's fair rnarket value as determined b the Cit Council �without meetin alI standards in this Cha ter. , Subd. 2. If such iowers are dama ed or destro ed to i�e exteni offift ercent 50% or more of their fair market value said value �o be deter►nined b Cit Council due to an reason or cause whatsoever the owners of the towers ma choose to rebuiid or remove the towers. If the ovvners choose to rebuild the towers the shall from and af}er the date of said � � destruction be sub'ect to all currern and a licable re laiions as s ecified b this Code. � � If such towers are dama ed or destro ed to an e�ctent of Iess than fift ercent 50% of ��°' r1�� their fair market value the towers ma be re aired and resiored to their former size �-' �`� " �\ ,��. h `� ei hi and use w�t}un one 1 ear af�er ettin a buildin ermit from the Cit . The location and h sicaI dimensions shail remain as the were rior to the dama e or destruction. •�..�� µl�u��l all��uaa� ►�� ne same manner and ursuant to the same roced�ares as for da» erous or unsafe structures estabtishea b Minnesoia Statutes Sections 463.15 through 463.26 SECTION 2. Section 1112.04 of the Mounds View Zoning Code relating io conditional uses in the B-1 zoning district is amended to add Subdivision 5 to read as follows: Suhd. 5. Commercial wireless telecommunications towers and antennae sub'ect to the rovisions established in Cha ter I 126 of the Zonin Code. SECTI�N 3. Section 1113.04 of the Mounds View Zoning Code relating to condiiional uses in the B-2 zoning district is amended to add Subdivision 6, ta read as follows: �ubd. 6. Commercial wireless te(ecommurucations towers and antennae sub'ect to the rovisions established in Cha ter 1 i26 of the Zonin Code. 0 Ordinance 5�8 - Draft ' December 4, 2996 Page 9 SECTION 4. Section 1114.04 of the Mounds View Zoning Code relaiing to conditional uses in the B-3 zoning district is amended to add Subdivision 8, to read as foilows: Subd. 8. Commercial wireless telecommunications towers and antennae sub�ect io the rovisions established in Cha ter I 126 of th� Zonin Code. �ECTION 5. Section 1 i 15.04 of ihe Mounds View Zorung Code relating tio conditional uses in the B-4 zonin� district is amended to add Subdivision 6, io read as follows: Subd. 6. Commerciai wireiess telecommunications towers and antennae sub'ect to the rovisions established in Cha�ter 1 i26 of the Zoning Code. SECTIOIV 6. Sectior� 11 Ib.04 of the Mounds View Zoning Code relating to conditional uses iri the I-1 zoning district is amended to add Subdivision 22, to read as follows: Subd. 21. Commercza.l wireless telecommunications towers and aniennae sub'ect to the provisions established in Chapter 1 I26 of the Zoning Code. SECTION 7. Chapier 1117 of the Mounds View Zoning Code pertaining io the Conservancy, Recreation and Preservation (CRP) District is amended by adding a new section 1 i 17.04, entitled "CONDITIONAL USES" relating to commercial wireless ielecommunication towers and antennae, to read as follows: � l 1 i 7.04 C�I�TI�I'i'IONA�. USES: The followin shaii be considered a conditional use in tt�e CRP District re uirin a conditional use ermit based u on rocedures set forth in and re�ulated b,y Section 1125.01 of this Titlel: Subd. 1. Commercial wireless telecommunications towers and antennae to a hei ht of no more than one hundred fe�t 100' unless rovidin for a co-locatin wiretess senrice then one hundred and twenty (i20'). Towers and antennae must conform with and be sub'ect to the rovisions established in Cha ter 1126 of'the Zonin Code. A utilit buildin to house necessarx et�uivment inte�ral to service provision shall also be allowed sub'ect to desi n lar�dsca in and screenin standards set forth iz� and re lated in th� Zogiin Code. 9 ; ,: ; . . , ; ,. z: ;. � . .,:, . >. , ,. � Ordinance 588 - Draft December 4, 1996 Page 10 SECTION �. Cha.pter 1118 of the Mounds View Zoning Code pertaining to ihe Public Facilities (PF) District is amended by adding a new section 111 �.03, entitled "COIVDITIONAL USES" relatiing to commercial wireiess telecommunication towers and antennae, to read as follows: 1118.43 CO�IT'IO�dAI, iTSES: The foItawin shall be considered a conditional use in the PF Disirict re uirin a conditianal use errnit based u on rocedures set forth in and re�ulated b Section 1125,01 of this Titlel: ... >�4 .. > . .. w.,u �� iflil �iauudiLiS SeL IOittl IIl Si1C! TE', lated in the Zonin Cade. SECTION 9. Chapter 110b.04 relaied to conditional uses in the R-1 district is hereby amended to add Subd. 8 as follows: Subd. 6. Commerciai wireless teiecommunications towers and antennae sub'ect to the rovisions esiablished in Cha ter I 126 of the Zonin Code. SECTION 10, Chapter 111Q,04 related io conditional uses in the R-5 district is hereby amended to add Subd. 10 as failows: Subd. 10. Commercial wireless telecommunications towers and antennae sub'ect to the rovisi ons establis hed in Chapte r 1126 of the Zonin� Code. la , i� .. . .. .. .. ... .. OCd1YldI1Ce SHg - DTaft December 4, 1996 Page 11 �ECTION 11. EFFECTIVE DATE: Tlus ordinarice goes into effect aft�r ttae City Council approves it and 30 days after its publication in the oPficiai City newspaper. Itead by the City Council of the City of Ivlounds View on 199�• Read and passed by the City Council of the City of Iv�ounds tliew on this day of �1997. ATTEST: (SEAL) APPROVED TO AS FORM: City Attorney n:\datalusers\jimelshare\tower.ord Jerome Linke, Mayor Charles Whiting, City Clerk—Administraior 11 l � ,!,:' =f -, r r 'i • .. : ;. .. t. MOIII�IJD� VIE�1V PI�Nl+�IIQdG COl�Ii�II�S�O�i IiECEN1i�ER 1$, � 996 7000 P.�Io (Revised A�enda - Previous Agenda I�ated December 4 By �ilistake) AGENDA MEETING AGE1�iDA 1'�1�TII�14x CO ��S�Ord: Call to Ord�E° Items for Desasian l. Caii to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on #he Agenda ___4____________.._______�.,m________..m4______aa_________________________m CITIZEN�: FIEFORE SPEAKING, PLEASE COME TO THE PODIUM, AND GNE YOUR FULL NAME AND �.DDRES� FOR THE MINUI'ES 4. �'9annis�g Case l�o. S�-Od31-9b Ordinance 588: Commercial Wireless Tetecomrnunications Towers and Antecu�as 5. �.djournnnent PI.� G COlVI1V1�S�I0I�i: Adjourn io A�ENDA SESSTOI� ' ''`j I�ereis for IDfseaession 6. Review and Approval of Minutes (October 2, 1996) 7. Staff Reports a. Forum an the First Ring b. Scheduling a Review of Bylaws c. Work Program for 1997 8. Chairperson and Pianning Commissioners Reports ��*#��*��*��*��*��*�� APPLICANTS: YOUR ATTENDANCE AT THIS MEETING IS REQUESTED. PLEASE NOTIFY CITY HALL AT 784-3055 IF Y4U ARE UNABLE TO ATiEND. 'TI-iANi� YOU. *��*��**�**��*��*��*�� c:\wpdocslplancoznm\agendai 2.1 S i :. ;.; i. _ , �i i. �i , ; Item ��4 � .;:, �� ' To: Fram: Subj ect Date: �� Mounds View Planrung Commission James Ericson, Planning Associate Commercial Wireless Telecommun'scations Towers and Antennae planning Case No. SP-001-96 Dec�mber I1, 1996 Meeting oiI)ecember 18, 1996 Issue On August 12, 1996, the City Council approved a 1�0-day moratarium on the new use, development or construction af wireless telecommunications services within the City (Ordinance No. 587). This moratarrium is set to expire on March �, 1997. The Planning Commission held a special session on October 23, 1996 to discuss tt�is topic at which meeting industry representatives were present �o give short presentations and to answer questions. Staff presented the Catnmission with a draft ordinance �or review on December 4, 1996, which generated additional comments and suggestions. These changes have been incorporated into a revised draft ordinance. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission review the attached revised draft of the wireless telecommunications ordinance and make suggestions and or commer�ts as to its conteni and provisions, If the Planning Commission considers the ordinance acceptable, staff recomnnends that the Planning Commission adopt Resoluiion No. 491-96 recommending approval of the ordina.nce to the City Council. An� A number of changes have been made io the proposed ordinance. Any language that 11as been added since the December 4, 1996 meeting is shaded. Some language has been deleted as a result of the that meeting and suggestions made by City Aitorney Bob Long. F'ors�ac�t for° SecP�on or� Dasi�acts �111oavan� T'eleco�aar�t�nicat�or�s F'acalit��s: The revised ordina.nce places the te� in section 1126,03, Subd. 2 relating to conditional uses into a table that enhances readability and comprehension. � i j_ ...' j ."�.:.'.-'j i Planning Commission Planning Case No. SP-00 i-96; Telecommunications Ordinance Decemher 12, 1996 Page 2 �4ccesso�y �uil`li�e�s: Also in �ection 1126.03, �ubd. 2, the requirement for CLTPs for accessary buzldings in ihe FF and CRP districts was deleted. In a subsequent section of the ordinance, texi was added that amends the PF and CRP districts to allow accessory equipment structures only when associated with a CV�TTS tower and/or antenna as a permitted accessory use. A1so regarding accessory equiprnent structures, text was added to the co-location requirements section that addresses how new buildings would be treated in reiation io e�sting buildings. La�sdscapin� � Sc�eenin�. Added to the ordinance is a seciion that makes explicit the iandscaping and screening requirements. Basically, a tree-scr�eri of evergreens and ornamentat deciduous trees is required �o be planted around the fence so that at least 50% of the accessory struc�ure and/or tower ba§e is screened from view. �ecause some sites may not need landscaping either because existing foliage is sufficient or because the site might be in the middle of an industrial site parking lot, the screening and landscaping requirement can be waived. Ps°oce�lural Ite�a�i�°e�zents: The o�her major change to ihe ordinance from its previous version is the addition of a lisi of submittal requirements for CUPs, sirziilar to wl�at had been listed under building permit requirements. Those requirements were moved under the CUP heading because the information would be needed in order to approve a CUP. If no CUP is required, then the same information would be required to be submitted with the building permit application. Also in the procedural section, a clarification was made to the praof of insurance requirement and an -� abandoned tower clause was added. Co-locranon: We have removed the requirement for a"letter of intent" which would have required all new towers to allow for co-location. This change was primarily znade due to legal considerations. The provision would not be workable anyway, because it was the Planning Commission's desire that an applicant have a signed leased agreement, or other such documeni, for the second user before they received the height bonus for co-lacation. If the applicant had a lease in hand, a letter of intent is not necessary. The other changes are minor and can be addressed during �he Planning Commission meeting on December 18, 1996, if the Commissioners have any questions. N:\DATA\U SERSI3IME\SI IA12E\TO WERM�M.PC3 i: ; ;i ; i I i; ? = i, _� `�; �- '�..`, i ` �' ` ��- '�" °�" � t;: �;. �,�.,,,,_,:, i,; ��'�. '��3 -1; ' �.' : :��, ��V _ Sg��s" �� lYAP�,l\e.��A� �j��/�J��l\ Yaa"8��1'/JC1�BiJ�Ra��i g� JCF�u'� lYXV V�� iV ��H 1 i��Vl\'V ��pp�Ip� p� Q�II��CIE 1�10. 5�8, AIV � INA�I�ICE Al�/IEI�I�ITVG C�A ER 1126 OF 'T�E i�/iO�TNI)S �II�`b�' ZOI�I�G COI)E �I,A'I'ING 'T� '��E I.00AT'I�l� , I'�I) DE�IGl� �F C� ERC�I, W I��S TEI�ECO1VIlVI�JNICAT'ION SE1tVICES 1��TI) FACII�I�'IES �IIT 'T�E CI� ��' I��TJI�Tl)� '�W � W�iEREA�, the li/Iounds View City Councii enacted a mQratorium on the new use, development or construction of commercial wireiess telecommunication services within the City of Mounds View in order to provide an opportunity for the study of this issue and the development of an ordinance to regulate such services; and, �THEREA�, the Mounds View Planning Commission has conducted research, �xamined ordinances from other jurisdictions, and received information from industry representatives and the North 5uburban Cable Conunission regarding this issue; and, WIiEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has conducted a series of work sessions on September 1 S, October 23, December 4 and I�ecernber 1�; and, WI-�EREAS, it is in the best interest of the communiiy, and a proiection to health, safety and welfare for the City to enact reguiations on the location and design of cor�nercial wireless telecommunication services and facilities. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RES�LVED that the Mounds View Pla,nning Commission does hereby recommend adoption of Ordinance No. 588 as shown in EXhihit "A." attached hereto and made a part of this resoiution by this reference. BE IT FURTHER RE50LVED that the Planning Commission directs Siaff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approvai of the minutes. Adopted this 18th day of December, 199b ATTEST: N:�DATA\U SERS\J IME\SHARE\TO W ERP C. RE S Jerry Peterson, Chairman Pamela �heldon, Community Developmeni Director i .�.'�.:'�. i - - 'i � � t t , - ,.. :�° ' ;; ; <� � . �; i; <r: . , s� r � �: �� ; �� : �_. � ,E�� ; ;; �;r � , . , . , , � � � -_ ; <� _ �. ��r � �t��. �- : 1 �� . - � ` � � ` ' r., _ a , ' '' . Q. , � . : . , �. , '�' ; ; �', .: �. , ` t: 1, : ``, �< . _: ;� ' ' , =' ' ' " . . �: ; ; � '',. .. � . ;�; ; i' ss ;1 .; �. : ; ! , f: , ; ; ;� : • ; :�: : `, ',1 1` '' " THE CITY OF A/IOUNDS �'IEW OItDAIlVS: SECTION 1: Chapter 1126 of the Mounds View Zoning Code is re-enacted to read as follows: ;>:;,:»::>:::; 1126a�}1: PiT�'OSE: The `�''fu� re ulation of commercial wireless telecommunications services (CWTS�.and facilities is intended to�rovide for the apt�ropriate location, develo�meni and ins�allation of telecommunications towers and antennae within the Cit of ,;'� Mounds View �"Ci�"l. The �rovisions of this Code are intended to �rotect the health safetv and aesihetic concerns of the communit b minimizin ihe adverse visual effects of towers and antennae throu h carefiil desi n sitin and screenin � b avoidin oiential dama e from tower failure to ad'acent ro erties throu h structural standards and setback re uirements' and b maximizin the use of existin towers structures or buildin s to accommodate new telecommunications antennae in the Citv. 1126.Q2: �9EF�dI'�IOl�S: The foliowin words and terms for ur oses of this Cha ter � shali be defined as follows: :: :.: ,.;:«:��:<�><:>;:>::::,:::>>:::::;::<::;::::::;�:::;<;,;.:;::::> cture �ubd. 1. ACCESSORY ��TRUCTURT�' A bu��a;��t �� t Xtke stru ......: :.::.:::.:::::::.::.:.:�:.:::.:.. :.::...;..:..:...:.:::::. :::>:.:>::<::;«.:.;::::;:::>;::<=:;<::�:>::::.:<:;::;::,.,:: .: . . . : . .... : : . : ;; .. . ..:.;.: ::., ....,:::.:.:.. located a�'a�_��a �x a.i� ��i� ��t�a�c�lafe� u�_�Y o£� a� ��wez. c�r :a�� a, �� I�o�e e ui ment customaril incidental to the receivin or transmittin of �vzz'��.�s:::�i�'�:��leas�s cellular tele hone calls voice messa in and a in services. Subd. 2. ANTEIVI�A �TEALTH: CWT� Antenna desi ned to blend into the surroundin environment or inte rated into ihe h sical stzu�ture to which it is attached. :; i::: ;1 i : Ordinance 588 - Draft December 4, 1996 Page 2 Suhd. 3. ANTENNA� ��uipment used for transmitting or receivin� radio �reque�cy si�nals which is aitached to a tower buildin_g or other structure usuall cons�stin of a serses of directional �anels, microwave or satellite dishes ar omnidirectional "whip" antennae. Subd. 4. BASE TRANSCEIV�R STATI�N: E ui ment that rovides the link between wireless co�nmunications and iand-based ublic tele hone switchin networks zncludin radio frec�uency transceivers, back u� power saurces �ower amplifiers, and si�nal rocessin hardware t ica�l rotected b a small buildin or cabinei. Subd. 5. CO LOCATION� The location of wireiess communications eQUipment from more than o�1e rovider on one common tower. Suhd. 6. COMMERCIAL V�ELE�� TELEC01��7VfUNICATIONS SER�TICE� CWTS : 1 11 1 nal Licensed wireless telecommunications service includm cellular di �ta ce u ar erso communication services�CS�, s�ecialized mobile radio �SMRl enhanced specialized mobile radio �ESMR�, commercial t�agin�services and simitar services rnarketed or �'l��J�; ::� rovided to the ernerai ublic. �ubd. S. TOWER LATTIC�' Three- or four-Ieg ed steel �irdered stntctures tvpicallv su ortin muiti le communications users ar�d services enerall ran in from 60 to 200 £eet in hei� 5ubd. 9. TOWER MONOPOLE' Single �ote desi�n _approximatel� three feet in diameter at the base narrowin� to a�roximately one and a half feet at the to�, eg nerally ran�in� from 25 to 125 feet in hei�ht. t, � :; , .. ��': . :, � ;�: '�. . ;� � �' ', ' '. �. i ` `' ` ;� . � �. .� ; �ubd. 1. Pe�me�ied �7sesg A�1 I)�sirM�ts° C�T►IT`S towers and ar�tennae shall be al{owed ir� anv district as a ermitted use on� as rovided beiow; S C;�1 i -., , ;.:: , . _ , .._ - -- - - ._ --- i.: Ordinance 588 � i�raft December 4, I996 Page 3 a. the Citv and�aid all applicable pernvt tees. b. C� lacation on �zist�n� Toe�ers° CWTS antennae shall be permitted to be — _ . . . . _ .__.4__� iL.. /'"�.s.� :�. nr.n�rr��nrP tx�94F1 t}'1P At111�i(:'`III�E `�:: obtained a building.�permit from the City and pa.id �11 ap�Iicabie�ermit fees. 5ubd. 2. C�nditia�al �Tses � eci%c I)�st�ict�o eTWS tiowers and antennae shall be allowed with the a roval of a conditional use ermit in the followin zonin distriets and in ,i accordance with the co location re�uirements stated in 5ection 1126.04, sitin� re uirements and desi n criteria stated in Sectiorn 1126.05 and the rocedurai re uirements stated in Section I 126.06. The rocedure for review and action on conditional use ermits shall be as stated in Section 1125.01: �s��ir�� I�is�rwa�ts '' 1lci�hELun►tattans� , �?irith Cs►-Focafat►ti R 1 R-2 R-3, R�4,1Z�5, R-O 20 feet above the height of the roof, N/A (antennae only) oniy if mounted on educational facilities, religious institutions, government or public utility buildings; or in "upward thiusting architectural elements" such as church steeples, bell towers ar smokestacksl B-1, B-2 75 Peet 95 Feet z B-3, B-4, I-1 100 Feet 120 Feet 2 CRI' and PF I00 feet, allowed only if incorporated into new or 120 Feet z existing facilities or stnactures, such as using the tower as a light standat•d for ball fields or parlcing areas, or into mature tree stands that provide a suitabie screen for at least half the height of the towez'. 1 In accordance with Section 1126.05, Subd. 7 of this Code. 2 Co-location height bonus subject to applicant providing to the City proof o� a signed lease arrangement, shared use agreement, or other Iike dacument. 'i Ordinance 588 - Draft December 4, 1996 Page 4 a. Planned Unit Developments �UDs)• In commercial or industriat PUDs, CVJTS towers and antennae shall not exceed one hundred feet 100' in hei ht. The hei ht of a tower may be increased u�.to a maximum of one hundred and twentv feet 120' to allow for the co-locaiion of another rovider's antenna suh ect to the a licant rovidin to the Cit roof of a si ned Ieasin arran ement shared use a reement or other like document The applicant shall fiie a re uest to amend the - ... . - ----_,.._..,...,..�, b. Condi�ional use �ertnits are not rec�uired for towers and/or antennae used b�he City for Cit�pur�oses or �uUlic a�encies %�ublic safety pur�oses; or for reuair or re iacement or ad'ustment of the elements of a C�ITS antenna arra affixed to a tower, if the re�lacement does not reduce acceptable safetv standards. 1126°04: CO-I10C�i'I'ION R�QIT + IVIEI�"TS: Subd. 1. A prot�osal far a new CWTS tower or antennae shall not be approved unless the a iicant can document to the satisfaction of the Cit that the telecommunications ec uit�ment planned for the�ro�osed iower cannot be accommodated on an existin�or a roved iower or commercial buildin s within a ona-half mile radius transcendin munici�al borders due to one or more of the followin�: � The lanned e ui ment would exceed the structural ca acit of the existin or a roved tower or commercial buildin . e '��:: � � The lanned e ui ment would cause interference with other existin or lanned e ui ment at the tower or buildin . Existin or a roved towers and commercial buildin s cannot reasona�il accommodate the lanned e ui ment at a hei hi necessa for the ro osed antenna to function. �;.: _ ,: -- ,. .. ,: . . - -- ; - �;;: , Ordinance 588 - Draft Deaember 4, 1996 Page 5 �:: B 1126.05: ��'i"II�G ANI� DESIGN I� �J _ l�El�'I'So The re uirements of this section a�lv to all CWTS towers and antennae erected canstructed nlaced, or r�laced in the City All CWTS ki�w�x' and aniennae shall be desi ned and situated fio be visuall unobirusive to minimize the im act u on ihe nei hborin uses aud shall conform to the followin� desi�n and siting criteria: :;::. .:::::<:;::;:: �::<::>::>:: . ;;:.<::>:::::::.;:;:»<::.;: Subd 2 Accessory_,�'c�u��erit'�`iri.��ir�s� The Base Transceiver Station BTS) and al ot er related e ui ment shall be housed �n a� existin builcim whenever ossible. If an existin buildin is unavailable a �new accesso e ui ment buildin ma be construcied accordin to UBC (�LTniforn� Building Code� rec�uirements and sha11 be of the same or better . . . . . _ tt___"�L._:1.77,..,�,. I�:�`i�k��;"a 5ubd. 3. Fencin : The CWTS antenna iower and/or accesso e ui ment structure shall be surrounded with an ei ht fbot �' tall fence so as to revent unauthorized ent and access io the e ui met�t buildin or tower. Barbed wire razor wire or electrified fences shall not be �er►�niited. i Ordinance 588 - Braft December 4, 1996 Page 6 Subd. 5. Color; The C�ITS tov�er and antenna shall be ainied a neutral color such as li ht re or s blue exce t as dictated b the Federal Aviation Adminisiration FAA and be desi ned to minimize visibilit and to blend into t11e surroundin environment. �11J11JL1 L1VLiVlA :4L'1� '. �:w: ...�..�� _ ___.. _... .. . .. . . .. . ........ ..... .:.. . . ............. . wired towers shall not be erinitted. �ctal towers shall be canstiucted of or treate w�t corrosive resistant materials. Subd. 7. Roof-mounted CWTS Antennae: Roof-mounted CVJTS antennae shall not be ermitted on buildin s with itched-roofrs unless incor orated into u ward thrustin architectural _ . .. � _' _ _1_ _a_ /1... Cl..+ «.�.-.�c t�n oint of the roof to which the antenna is attached. 5ubd. 8. Prevention of Radiation: CWTS aniennae shall be sub�ect to state and��ed�eral � re lations re ardin non-ioiuzin radtation and other health hazards re ate to suc faciliiies. if ihe federal overnment ado ts new more restrictive standards the antennae sliall be made to com�lv or the antenna may 6e removed bv th� Citv at the tower owner's ex ense, The owner or o eraior of the tower shall a an associated costs of com liance verification. Subd. 9. Li hts: I�10 CWTS tower or antenna shall have affixed or attached to it in an wa exce t durin iime of re air or instailaiion, anv ii hts, reflectors flashers. day-time strobes or steadv night time li ht or other illuznination devices exce�t as rec�uired bv the Federal �:, '1 i 1 Ordi�ance 588 - Draft December 4, i996 Page 7 Subd 10 Si�ns and Advertisin�� The use of anv portion of a tower for si�ns or advertising, other than re� ired warnin� signs shall be �rohibited. Subd. 12. Intezferer�ce with Puhlic Safety Teiecommunications: No new or existin� telecommunications service shall interfere with ublic safet telecommunications. ��° �� r �.� � � ;_ s � ; ;,, . . , � � : �� . �:: � `�:: _ . _.. .... ....._._ ..::::::::::.�::.:::::: ::.::.:::.>;:<.;::<.,;:<.;:::,::.::;:;.�:.<.:;::><.::<:; =::;:.:>:::::::<:«:,..;.<:.::<::»:::;.>::<.>: :«;<; __ _ .:::: ::::::.::.:::.>: ;>;:.;:..;;: :..:::::.;:;;>:�;:.;::::::::::.::<.:.:..;;;:;:;,;:: ::;:..:<:.:.<..>::.;: ::>. ;: ;.: .:: . .;::: ...:.. ::: .:::: ,;:: : :: > ;. ;..: .: : ,; <:; . ;:;,;:>;:,:�:<.> :�:;;:>>::.;::.:._;:.::.::::; »::>::..:::..;..:::.:::. :.: ...:.......: . ;:..: :. : .. .,:.;.;:.:._:.. :,:: .. . .:<:;...:.. :.: ��:: �:.:. : ��m��s.' ::. tf.'.�.'. f°n..:... .... �t�:°'. : . � :.r� �e �.:�� : �::. .:...:.��o�:>�..1��: £��:::. .::.��.: �:�:.: � :. .. .. ....... ... .. d. Sufficient information to show that construction installation and maintenance of ` will not create a safetv hazard or dama�e to the ; ,: `ov�rec ��dJvr ��r�r�� th��'�'�'� � propertv of other persons. e. A report and plan from a c�ualified and re istered en ineer or firm that s eci#"ies and includes the followin�_ 1. The tower hei�ht and desi�n includin� a cross sectian and elevation, .. : ,. ; i: . : . . <r. _ _ -_: . . , _ , . . _ , _ , . . . . ;_ ; ; ,.' ,i Ordinance 5�� - Draft December 4, 1996 Page S 2. 3. 4. 5. The hei ht above rade for all otential mountin osiiions for co-located ante�ae and the tninimum se�aration distances between antennae. The capaci� oi'the tower�including the number a.nd type of antennae that the tower can accommodate. The ste s that the a iicant will take to avoid interFe�-ence with estabiished �ublic safetv telecommunications. An en ineer's st�m and z'e istration number. _. .. ._ ............. .:::::::::.�::.:. �:,;:::::::<.:::.>:;;::<.>;;;;:� .::.;:;.::: �::;:;>:;:::<:>:::<:;:;:: <::.<.>::>::::>:::>:�::.<:::<::;:::;>-.:>>,;>:::<::� ::;:<:>::<::; :: :<:>: :::::::; �::;::<: >� :: ::.:::::> :>::;:,;;:<<:;...; �: ..;.,. . :.:»>:<:;:::: :;:::: <,::,:::<,::: �:.<,;«.:: � :::;:.;:;>;:.::: ::.. �:;::::.;;::.. : . :. ,.. <:: � �. , ;> ; � .: ; . � . ;<: :::: ;: : _ ;; .: .. ::::: . : . . . : ,. .:. .. : :>. . :�<;:i��-:: ° . �=: : �:� t � ::::��:=: .: . :: r. , : . �:<v��=:: .. , .� . . n.:; .:�.�6_!�� .:: . �..: :..:�:: �'.. �i . :: <:; < . . :, . An other information necess for the Cit to evalua�e the CUP. �ubd. 3. Deanonstr�teo� of IVeed� The �plicant shall demonsirate, by providin� a Citv-wide coverage/interference and ca�acity analysis that the location of the proposed CWTS tower and/or antenna is necessai to meet the fre uenc re-use and s acin needs of the wireless s stem and to rovide ade uate covera e and ca acit to areas that cannot be adequatel sv erved by iocatin� the antenna on an e�stin� structure. 5ubd. 4. Pro�i �f I�surance: The a licant shall rovide the Cit with a co of the insurance olic which rotects the residents and ro ert owners from ersonal in'u or ro � damaa�e and holds harmless the City from anv and a11 claims resultin� from the . � _ , .; i�;:.a: >;;:, ') 4.. Ordinance 588 - Draft December 4, 1996 Page 9 � >:'� l��i: >:E: � r£?s-£.i'. � . ;' �''':CC14?kz �::;;:;::,::->::;:;.:;:::;::��:::;><<s:::»:=:>;:>::<;�: �:<>:,;<::<: <;<:: ' :;:�3� `C�i1�.. r�st`:;r��:: ��: :e :: ,°::.;orhr�sr 1126.d7: E�ISTI�TG �''T5 AN'�'EN�1AE ANI� T��'iI�S' CWTS antennae and towers � in e�stence as of the date af enaciment of this ordinance that do not meei or complv with the provisions of this Cha�ter are sub�ect to the followin : Subd. 1. Existin towers ma contii�ue in use for their existin ur ose but ma r�ot be re laced or structurall altered to an e�ent exceedin ten ercent 10% of the tower's fair markei value as determined b the Cit without meetin alI standards in this Cha ter. Subd. 2. If sucli tower is dama ed ar desiro ed to the extent of fif� ercent 50% or more of its fair tnarket value (said value to be determined bv the Cit�due to an r�ason or cause whaisoever the owner of the tower ma choose to rebuild or retnove th� tower. If ihe owner chooses to rebuild the tower it shall from and after the daie of said destruction b� sub'ect ta all currer�t and a licable re ulations as s ecified b this Code. If a tower is dama ed to an e�ent of less than iiftv perceni (50%1 of its fair market value, the tower ��,P� �h�lt ha.ve one vear in which to obtain a building pertnit from the CitX and to repair Subd. 3 Removal oiAbandoned or Dama ed Towers: An tower and/or antenna that is not used for one ( l.} vear sliall be deemed abandoned and the�ro�ertv owner shall remove then r��x�P,- a„�1/nr antennae in the same manner and�ursuani to the same procedures as for SECTION 2. Section I 112.04 of the Mounds View Zoning Code relating to conditional uses in the B-1 zoning district is amended to add Subdivision 5 to read as follows: 5�abd. 5. Commercial wireless telecommunications towers and antennae subiect �o the rovisions established in Chapter 1 I26 of �he �oningLCode. I ; :.. _': ; ��,. . ; .-;, . _, ;. ,.:. .�;i .. . .. ....- .. ... .... . . . ...... � - ,:. :� ;:,. . ,�.. .. ,:>, ... ,...;: ��. �.�.,�.�. ;.�.:� . . �:., . ..� �:: �, . ,. ...:: _ . .::�� .-.�.. �.�; . i � . `:..: . . ..:_, ._ ,: ..'... . ;:. ��. Ordinance 588 - Draft December 4, 1996 Page 10 SECTION 3. Section 1113.04 o�the Mounds View Zoning Code reta�ing to conditional uses in the B-2 zoning district is amended to add Subdivision 6, io read as follows: Subd. 6. Commercial wireless telecommunications towers and antennae sub'ect to tihe rovisions established in Cha�ter 1 l 26 of ihe Zonin�`Code• SECTION 4. Section 1114.04 of'the Mounds View Zoivng Code relating to conditional uses in the B-3 zoning district ;s amended to add Subdivision �, to read as follows: 5ubd. �. Commercial wireless telecommunications towers and antennae subject to the provisions established in Cha�ter i 126 of the Zonin� Code. SECTION 5. Section 1115.04 of the Mounds View Zoning Code relating to conditional uses in the B-4 zoning district is amended to add Subdivision 6, ta read as follows: ;'� Subd. 6. Commercial wireless telecommunications towers and anteru�ae sub'ect to the rovisions es tablished in Cha ter 1 i26 of the Zonin Code. SECTION 6. Section 1 l 16.04 of the Mounds View Zoning Code relaiing to conditional uses in the I-1 zoning district is amended to add Subdivision 22, Yo read as follows; Subd. 21. Commercial wireless telecommunications towers and anteilnae subiect to the rovisions established in Cha ter 1126 of the Zonin Code. SECTION 7. Chapter 11 l7 of the Mounds View Zoning Code pertaining io the Conservancy, ,: Recreation and Preservation (CRP) District is, amended by adding new sections 1117.04:::��iC� ....... . <::;<:�:>::::;;:>::�: �:�: �;:>:::::::>: :: : ...;:. °;<::;>...> �� « A.L USES" relatin to ;:.;:::.:;.;:«.;:.::.>;:.;:.>:.>:.;:<.::<.;:. titled �»:�:��:�.��:�<;LI;��,��,;;;;: and CONDITiON g 1 � ;1 � �?�, �r�sp��.i�e1�; en : .:.�:., ,::, -, , ..: _ . conunerciat wireless telecommunication towers and antennae, to read as follows: >�`�<�`:�':�t� �i � Ordinance 588 - Draft December 4, 1996 Page 11 1 I 17.05 COI�IIBI'I'IONAI. ii�ES° The followin� sha(1 be considered a conditiona[ use in the CRP District (requirin� a conditiona( use permit based upon nrocedures set forth in and re lgu ated bv Section 1125 O1 of this Title): Subd. 1. Commercial wireless telecommunications towers and antennae subiect to the provisions established in Cha ter I 126 of the Zonin Code. SECTION 8. Chapter 1 i I 8 of the Mounds View Zotung Code pertaining to, the Public Facilities ions 1118.03 aii�:=:�:;:�:>�:$::;��`;:��s�.;:�i;�$�? entitled (PF) District is amended by adding new sect .:� :::......................:.s.....:,..� .. . ��.>. . ,:.�q;�:��1��;�:lf��" and "CONDITIONAL USES" relating to commercial wireless . :.::..:.......:.... . . . .. . . telecommunication towers a�1d antennae, to read as follows: :�1::�<:i��:C�� 1118.04 CO1�ID�'I'IOI�AI� �TSES° The followin� shali be considered a conditional use in the PF District �rec�uirin� a eonditional use permit based u�on procedures set forth in and regulated by Section 1125 O1 of this Titlel: Subd 1 Commercial wireless telecornmunicaiions towers and antennae suhiect to the provisions established in Cha�ter 1 i 26 of the Zonin Code. SECTION 9. Chapter 1105.04 related to conditional uses in the R-1 district is hereby amended to add Subd. 8 as follows: Subd. 6. Commercia� wireless telecommunicaiions towers and antennae sub'ect io the rovisions established in Cha�ter 1126 of the Zonin Code. . i:' . �� ::� .. i;; ° �:- .. �.i�. { -:� Ordinance 58� - Draft Becesnber 4, 1996 Page 12 SECTION 10. Chapter 1114.04 related to conditional uses in ihe R-5 district is hereby amended to add Subd. 10 as follows: Subd 10 Commercia! wireless telecommunications towers and antennae subiec� to the �rovisions established in Chapter 1126 of the Zonin� Code. SECTION 1 l. EFFECTI�IE DATE: This ordinance goes into effect af$er the City Council approves it and 30 days after its pu6lication in tihe ofiicial City newspaper. Read by tlne City Council of the City of Mounds View on ,� 997. Read and passed by the City Council of the City of Mounds View on this day of 1997. ATTEST: (SEAL) APPROVEI� TO AS FORM: City Attorney n:\data\users\jime\share\tower. ord Duane McCarty, Mayor Charies Whiting, City Clerk—Administ�-atar � � f i., �, :, , � i ��:as _,� _,; ��._. •,.� ;. C �j �Y /5 %I � ' -1 ' f f. � i �. f Ci }.: �.... \ ��+ , � � f� � I • ' L _ /2 1 � � � t r ,%: .t ," y` . � „t, 1 � . _ ; -,, ., r � ' �,::: . / \� � � r .. �. � . -..:, � )r_, k` C.J I) � l.f.>/ .��. �}. %i �i,' �/ � � fJ (�"1..� � , } � � �': (._ �. . � . ', --. _ ' ii j lf 1 � I j i rt � I ,1 r � � ifi. : . J 1 . , ,., , J ; i ; ' ......: . .. .. : . . i . � i i 1 t! i t' J. 1 ;