Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packets - 1996/10/29 ::ti4::::;t�:5:'t:2::::::: ,.::}:::::::f:`•::i;i:i:::3:;::i:#i '�i:fi:i.•`::i::"{:. .:}:•::{isi::i:::;:isi::iin:•:i.}:•}:•:;:::?•:{{?{<;:>:.>:::;}:•}:•}}:•}:•}:<.}:.}:•}:•}:•}:•:t:•}:•}:•`}:•}:•}::•::r}}::•::•::3;}:;::::::: ::i:?:i2::.?:::::::::::::::`•::::: }:•}.£�.•%<:::r:;+iriii::ii::iiti::? .+•:::::::5?i'f::S::�:: ::S:;SS i ::Vx:::::x:•::v:r• �ii:i`viiii ii i:Y•i iii;;iii:i:i:;;}::i::i::,:.i:'+.'{:ii is i:i::iiii;;i ii::S:iY:::::•:•:i;;i:;'•:::::i::::'/.::i}ir5x:::{{.}:pv}:v'. :,'?.:X:{;::::::ytiti`::'• Sr i:::•}:.}}:ry:G:Gr:G}:.}}}:{???}:r,•:•:•h'ti:.:•}}:•rx ii:'+T.:i iiiiii;:i$iiii:•:;:;:};;f :.vv :•.v:.:v: .{{4:}:;:iiiii:•i:::::::{}:::i?•rr:•}:•}:•}}:•}:•}:•}}}?;::•:{{{i•:{•}:•}:•}:•}}}::•}}::}}}}}}}}}}}:�:{{.}.}:•}:•}:•}.v:.:v::•. iK:"'•.•fi.•.•::::::::.•.Av:\•}\v:::::::::::..v:.v::::?v.•:.......v. •.v 4:rvx:::.:v:.xv:v::::::::::::::::::::::.v. .. 4:.•.v:•i:w::::vv••.v::::•::•:::•::•v:.v:::: ...:w:.:y::irih; v..... ...;;......n....:::}:{•}:S:{•}:ti•}:•:•}}{i:::{i '� .......:...•.•....::•:i...{.:::..:....:.•:::::}}" .n kA��::::w:::....••.v::,• v::x::::::x::::.w::u++}}:•}ii::ii:•i:•iii;:ii;::::•:•ii i;:::}:::•::::i:::;y;.•y}::{.:.};nv;:.v:.}•:::::::.v... ........3h .}'4 x.......:...... .. ... ...... .. .x x........v ....v.;...•:v:....:::•}}:•}:;.:v...:::v:::.v::::::::.v:: ... ...........i................:...:. ...........A.. ..v.:;•v:v:xv:r..4... ...::.v^:w:.:...w.w.v:•:::44.....::::::.::v.v.:.v:.•........ ..:..:.:.................n...r...............vv:.::.x ... ....'h... nA............n v .�..rv......v.}}Y......:..........................v..........w::::::::v.v}}}}.:•}}i:•r:•}}:•:4;.r;.r}}r;•};•}:::}};•}:•}:•}:•}:•}:{•}:i�:•}:i+•:•:•}:•}:v.......:vv;:.................. '.n\.r':::?vy;•':i:%{ri}:'{}+ii'i}::r:::::ii•iii{:}i::v:;:{{i{::i:;}:::::::i::':}::{:;};•;:::::::':::;:i`::i:::i:i::iii'::irii::{{:i::::i::i::l::::':i:::•:is; :::;::•i::::::::::i::iii:j:'.::`vii:`•::>}:i:}iiiYi:::}i::i::::i;::•:ti::•:::;:::::ti•: k��:. .,};•.i ti::T;:'}:{':'}}ice:}:: v:\4,•.} ':v\v'•Y};{;??;:r;4r;?tiff+ •:itii?4:i4:•:{{•i::••:v:•:•:ii:i:•:•i:•:::•i:•:::•:ii}•:•:•i:•::::iii:i'.:jiii:i}ii$iii ii tii: x:i •.. v:::.v:::::.•.v:;......:.•:•.:.rr:+:::::•.v:::}:•}}}}}i'i:ii i:::;''?;:Nii;::•}'v::::}:::'v':ii}:::i�:'tii ii{::iii i'ii{{::•;::i i•:•:::iiii.':};'•.::::iy :i:'r::'f.'i::r,?:i. AA ..:;:;••;;:ii;}ii}}:h:{r•{ih:•r:•}:?:?i{{;}:•}:•}}}:•:}}}ti}}}}:::'};:'}:;::::;•::{i.}v.:rv.{{:i�•r�Y}:i :::t ::ii:i;:i i;'.;ii i ii ii::i ii::'+•'•::•.'•.}. }, •i:ii;:::ti;<tiff:{�:,���:�.�:,Yti:::}� �i::i::'isi isi:::{�ti{i•}}:•}}}}}:•}i}};•;{.}}:+?•}:ice:•}:i�:•}:•}i'. .xA.v.:}•.. '•}r:{'ti:.....x..ti�::. .. v: :..r..v:}}...; v .'f,�F••:;v. {v"• '} .�;+ •.' '•:•'eSS.. ..rf.::::::iii:.}:•:�::}:::.�::.i:.i;%.:$:•::::: �:::{•::::::::::::::;;::. :i;:}';;$::•.'•.'•.':::itisi•.,•�::;•.'r::::::::;'r,::::::::'r,::•,,::::: ::::{r;;:;:j;}..'•:::ti:::::i::{::$:::i::nv: {xA::::r ..........\{•::?•:..v,:,.:{4}}}.\i:}4}:h•.:w}::}}}\..h........:. ...:v.xv:::w:x:::::::::::::}:{•:•}•:Oii::::'rii:::i:::;::::;:}ij::;i;'?:::ti::? ..........\..............................."i '•}'•:i{fi:{•:{•}:•.44.......n.x•::::}::•}:•}:{.}•.:•}•:::::.:::.r:G:•}::•:i.}:.}^'v.':?•.:::v.. ..v..........v...'... r.............rvv.w:}::::•::•:v v::•:w::::..;...:..........................v....... }•.:w:n... ��444\.....v 444v.:•+v'n}..i:.i}is4;•i;•}:w;.•.v:::{'::;•........'v'•;{.}.. ..4•v}}}:+•}:is x:.y.; .....yr.}::•}:•}}}:.:i:iiii}i':•;}:ii:;i::•};:;::;:•$}i:•i::ii i:4::}:w::nv:$iir::::::ti.:?;ii{::iL::;:;:i ii•:� v.. v. .•..r.�.v.:......:v ........ .. .... ..•.;;}r;•:ii4}:4:•:ii::t:ii}i}}•}}}}}}}::..::.:::::::::.:v::::nvx::v:::::::.v::.::v:..v:::::::::..:::::;.:::::::::::nv +vii•x .••:'.}.•.{''{i•}:•}:•:::::..•.•:.•.•.•:.:.:::?•::i•} v;•{ .•:.i4.::::::::::..•:::::A::::::::::::•i':;{r'iv,:::i::}}:i:::;'::'};:ii:::ii::{}x i:;:;+{:i::{}.i n............: .. .....::::iin:{4}}}};4}:ry{:•}..{:.v{•r}iv4}}}v}v::..{:::::::::.}}•.i::::::::::y'+•}'•}Y:�v:::::.}:..}vr:::::: .. .. .........:...............x...... ...............v...viiv...::.......:..\iii:iii::i::•;:i:•ii;::•:::•:::•:::•:•::::ii}:•}$.{•;;{i{.::.}:h'•:v w::::::::::::v}:::•:;•}:•:••:}::v::r;:¢:•}:•}::•}:?:4:•}:•:::•:::•}:•}:•}:•:{v}:v:v..::•:;:•}:•}:}y}::.::::::: ,} \...$r•:::::::::::}:fi,.:::v::::.•::{•.v+:^v:::.r::....v:::::::v.:...:::::::.............::::::.:.....•:::::::::::x::•::••:::.::::v:.v::::::::::::v;•:.::::::}}::::::::::::::::::::::rrv:::::::::r v:::::w;:•.::::::::•::::::::vxv.... •:;}:::::::::{?:ii;::ii:}::iv:::::::::::::::iiiii:•isi:•ii;;i::ii::ii'ii:::i::i'ii::i::i::i::'r::iiii::::::::::::::::•+:;'::2::ti:ij::;:;ii;;:}:::i}:i::i::i::i::i::it{{•}:•.++ r.x..::.::.:::::v::;•;:.......:;4;4:+4.w::::::;;+•:v}:{.,..•}}tir.\..::.•.v:.v.•+x::::::.•:{::{r:::::n}:•:?4}.......................................................................................................:.::.:................../ i,........ .......: v.::•::•.v::;v.'.}:.}:•:�:v......,:..vv..isw:}.4;{ytiiv:•:{•i:•}:•}::::•}:4;•}:•}:::•}.v:...n::::::;{•}:•}::v;•}}:•4:•vi}:4:•i:•}:4:4:•}:{}:{v:�:•}:•}:::}r:•}:•}:v:•}}:4:•}:•}:•}:{?•i}:G:L{{:L:•}:?•'•:•:•:•}}}:^:^}:•}:•}:4:h:4:{i::::•}:•}:.}r.r vv\tiir{?:�};4}tii4:??{•ti iiii4}}:•i:K{•}}}:.}}}:{.:{.:?{.}:•}'r}:{•}}}r}:•}::{•}:•}{?::::}}:�i}}}:•r:{{{.:•}}}}?:•:?:{{•}}'•}:4:•}:•}:i{4:4:hv:•}:i�:4:4:•i:?{:•::•}}}:4rr}:•}:^i•}'•}:•}:4:4:4:4:4:•}:•}:•}:v. ..... i vr}..v}}}rv: \}rviivi%ii'i'iii:}::ivw::::w:::::.v::.v.x:::.w::::::::::::x:.v:::::::::::::.w:::•.:::::v.�i.:.::::::::v::x:::::..v:::::::}:::::::.:v:::::.v:::::::::.:x.•::.:::::::::::v: ::.v,•riA{:.::..;iv}4n{;4::.}::}•.};:.\,v.\;):.::..::::::.........}.... :...,.....:::::::....;..::x::• w;;. \....8 ..;...........;.....:::::......::::::::.............. .. .. ...A.n..�v..:i{4}}}: .. .}.: ..:.. ::{. :4}. {..::.}}}: n'n'::. '. :. .. :... '4}' '.}}r}k ::: } {: ;iy:::}{: :::i:::}::ri•:•i:::•::i::i::i}i::i::i::isi::i::i::i::i::i::i$::i:::::.. A........}4'?"•:i4r:4:•r:4:•r:?4:{4r}'4:•}i}:•:•:•}i:•i:`{:•:•:•:{ .� i '•••:is�;:•,;,.;:•,�.�,.; ;i:'i:?::'tiii iii}+%iv:'i:?ii:`•iii;:ii:}:is::,::::::,:;:•:i•:;:;::::ii'tt ..n4... ..Av,..•.v.v:::}::.•.•.v:::::.. ..�.v.\:iiiiii{{: .}:•ti4:•:w}::::::•}:i•}}}:•::;:i:;ir:•}}:•:•}i::::}i:;:•}'•}•}i:•}i:SiiYii:•itii:�::ii::::i::::ir}}}}}:?•}}:•}}:4:•}:4::'r::}:•}:4:•iii.r::v::::i::i.'•} i::i::i::i:::;{::?:'::i::i::ii::•}:+•i::::::`::: ihh........:4..x: ti}}ti:•}:•}}:{4:•}}}}}}}:;titi::•:4i:4:•:•i}i:•:•}:•:•?•i:•i::i{jiii:{<:<,+..rii::i:::::i:�•'::::i;<;':i:::Lfi:isisi::�:Yii:•ii::::::iir•:i3:ii:iiiiii i:::ii::iri<:ri}r:i•:::•:•iiv:'$:�:::•:•::: • n.\4'4..x..........:....::::::x:.x..................:::::.•....}:{.:•:{.:•}}}:•:{iiia:::{:iiiii•..n................n.....................................................................::.......................r................................... �iii<iiii'..{'...:4}ii:•:::ii;;+.::•:•,:ii:{i:ii:�.`•::$:;}:' :i::\ilii::::i::}:::::::::::ti:::::�:':i:: %i:::.+•:::<i;;:::,:if�;;:::>j:;i::i:::::i;::'r::::::i:::vv:::+{::iiiiiti:':':':is ii::':}:::i:i::::i: i:}i:ti:::vii::::i;::ryi:•,:i::ti:i;:::::'ir'r::::::':':Y:•;i:;:;:i.:;:•,:,:•,;:;:i:;i; k{.:•ii:•i:•:ii'{'•:•:isx;::::•:::•::i::;:::•,::{i::ii:'.:::•,:::•,:iii itis:;iii:i::}:•,:ii:•,::•,<:?i:�?'ii::i::iv...:.....::iiiivv::.w:::..vw:}:}:::::::::::r:::::n.::::::.:::n::rr:::.:w.:v:::::w:::::::.•:::::::::.:::.v::::::::::::nvwnw::::::::::::::::::::.:.::.•::::::..:::::::: ii;:i:i:::•:{};?;:i;:i:::i::iii%,:•,:ii:;:•::i:.{::•>i:•:::•::i;:i$ri};i;;::i;i::iii ii i:•:ii:}':i}::..is .w::::::::;:•:;, ... ....... .:.. ..::• :::•w::::•:w:::w::w:::w::.:::v:.:v::•:::::::..;....::::w:•:::::::::...:::::.:::.::••:.::n. ::::i:::.vy:::.v. Y+ :+•'•}:v 4}. ::•: .:{::i:•}:•'{pi pv:::::w::::::n{•::::::::::::.v:::::::::}::•i i:•i:::{:ir:?:;.}•:?.}}}'.}v}:w.Y::•:.v.:v:}:4::wniY iii4liiiiii:::i::::t•'.::•'.::i'is}''i ''i::'#.�Y::::`iiii::i«�:ii:;•.':i:::iii:::2:::ii::::ii::i:"v::::::j::::ii':iii::::::ii::::i::ilii::::y:::::::::5:>:iii:i>::i•.'•.;::4 i;?:•.,:::i::: :iiiiiiii:%iiiiiiiii:;:ii;:::iii;'iii:::•ii:•:•i:•:•:vi:•iii iv i:•:i'i i:•i::�i:+•i:::::v iiiiiiiiii}:�:-iii:ii?ii:•ii:•ii::iii:•:tiii::isi::?':•:•:•ii:':•ii%i:•:•iiii:�i:�iiiiiiiii$iiiiiiiii;iiiii:•ii i;:;:;ii:•:•ii:is :i}\ti4': ii tii::i iiiii::iiii::iii i;:ii:•:•:•:iti:'::i:::::;`:::;::{::,::i:::i i:::':iiii:::;:<:?<ii�?' in4'::ti::i:-;::,ti:::;+i:::ii}:i iii::::i::i::ii::i:;iiisr:?5;::::::i::::::i:;i:;::::i::iii:•::iii:;:::i:::i i•+::i::}:i;ii iii?:iiviii.+•.+•ii.+•iiii:},'•i:iiM1:v:'i::: ti'ii:•,•::i::,$i::i:•ii:•:;:.?}iii::;i i:{iii}'kiiiiiiii«:'i;:tii i�n4' �ii4�iii:i:•i i iiviiii?v:•i:•:•:ii?•,'ti:ti:L}' :tiff:�:::}::ii;>.ii?i:•::i;:i:::::ii:•;i'•;?:i:i:i:;i:;i ii:i:ii:i:�''}' .::J.b •::\•iii,>.i:;{•::}iii:i�:i;:i::`:i{'i{i''' .\:is4:•}:?4}:•i}}}i:}:F•}:4:{{•i:•}i:•}};•r•}r;•}:?�iiiiiiiiiiiii'ii:iiiiiii i:•i};:}i::i iii ii i:�i i.�ii iii;iii:�i::iiiiiiiiiiii:...r. 4>.•\tititi ti4:tiiti4:iiti4:4}:•i'4:i•}:•i}...........v. :tiff\i:•i::r.. is%.i::ii;:;;tir:•:ii:::i:i iii:iii::•;:i'?'}:'i: �i::}::i+iiitii%!+ iv;4'•.Axi".;•{.}}}v},•.}:••.ti i:•i:4:{.ii ii:?.i:•}:•}}iii:::::•:itii:i::i:•:•}}i:•:vvv{:i ti4:?•}:i4xvnv 4}4v.:v::.v:::::.....\4..:'ii::i:t:i:::::::';::i::,Li;:;i:{:. :::titiii:ivji::i::iii i t s:':iii i::ii i ii i:`•ii;:i;:i:;::•�;}':::,.i::;::,Fvii:::ti4iv'ivitix 4}...:.w:,:•:�.......x:h.,i......n:.v::::::::..:::.•.::::.v:..:..•.:::•:::.vr..:....:v.....v ...v.... .... ... ... ... •::..4:?4'4;{•r:•}}:•}:•}:{:•}:•}:4:{{•}:4}}:•}}}:4}:•:•:•:•i:4}:•i:4}:•:•}r:•:4:4:•:•:i 4:4:•}:4:•}:•}:•}:^:4:•}:4:4:4:4:4:4:•}}:•. �'•.. \......r. .. ................................................•...................)t:....}... :.: .; ;., ... ..;.:..:•.v::::::::.x:::::::::w::::.v:::::::x::::::v:u::v::::.v:::::::::::}:::::::w.•:.;..:::::: �Cvv\w:.v:. v4x4\4 w::n•.vw.x:v:.•:::::::::::::xv v:}.•}::.•::::}.vv.•. :^:+'f.4:???+i}}}:4:4:i4:iiii{ii•}i}:•r! ...v:•r..n4 .............................}.•:4};•:•:•}}i:•:.}:i4:{�:•:•i:::{•:.:•:•}:S:•:•}:{?4r........vvv.vv .... •• .}:? '•{•::{q. •..:' ?•.}':::::::x::::::.}'+?>•:•}:4:+•:•}:4•:.is?4'•i:{.i:•}:.}ii'.•::}r}}r::.. ..,rr};•};•}"i•:{.};4}}}i}r}:{4:•}y:•:•:.}}i}:'{6i:+•}}Y•i s4i'•is4:•isti{•}:•}:4i:{4i:•}:•:{.:a............. . .:.'. ::�:?�::::: `A"y::'t:t:::::::::i::::::::i::::i::::::::::.:::': :: ::::i:`2'':i i'::;:r2"':i�:::iii:::::;i:::::::::i::::i:::::::?•?.::::•i.�:�r?i:�:%i+ rrr:r:::::::. .}:{iic•}>•::;:::?.::::.}:.}:•.�:...:......:...::}:.}xr:.::.;•:.:�::}:•:::::::::::.�.:�.i•i:::.::::::•i}:.::::::............r:::::::.......................::::::::::::::::::.:.......................... The City Council is provided background information for agenda items in advance by staff and appointed commissions; committees and boards. Decisions are based on this information, as well as City policy and practices, input from constituents and a Councilmember's personal judgement. If you have comments,questions or information regarding an item on the agenda,please step forward to be recognized by the Mayor during the "Residents Requests and Comments From the Floor"item on the agenda. Please state your name and address for the record. All comments are appreciated. A copy of all printed materials relating to the agenda item is available for public inspection at the Recording Secretary's Table. • 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL- Linke Quick _Hankner Trude Blanchard 4. Agenda Additions Item 1: Item 2: Item 3: 5. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MINUTES: October 14, Regular Council Meeting COUNCIL ACTION: A T D Comments: AGENDA PAGE TWO 1111 OCTOBER 29, 1996 6. ACCEPTANCE OF ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTES: EDC Minutes-August 22, 1996 COUNCIL ACTION: A T D Comments: Planning Commission Minutes-August 7, September 4, September 18, 1996 COUNCIL ACTION: A T D Comments: 7. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS: • 8. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approval of Resolution No. 5031 Approving Just and Correct Claims Against City Funds. B. Declaration of Surplus Items. Staff Report No. 96-1878c. C. Set Public Hearing for 7:05 p.m.,Monday,November 12, 1996 to Consider Ordinance No. 590, an Ordinance Relating to Setbacks for Parking Lots, Driveways and Principal Accessory Buildings;1\Enimum lot area for Non- Residential Uses Listed as Conditional Uses in Residential Districts, the Continued Use of Non-Conforming Parking Lots, and Amending Title 1100, Sections 1102.01, 1104.01, 1104.02, 1106.04, 1107.05, 1109.04, 1110.04, 1121.09, 1121.11, and 1123.02. D. Approval of Resolution No. 5032, Reclassifying the Position of Economic Development Coordinator to Economic Development Director. Staff Report No. 96-1882C. E. Licenses for Approval HVAC Central Plumbing- New AGENDA PAGE THREE OCTOBER 29, 1996 CDM Heating and Air Conditioning-New More's Burner Service Inc.-Renewal Vern's Service and Supply-Renewal General Construction(Commercial)-New James Steele Construction Company Asphalt-New Lazer Asphalt Inc. Siding-New Season's View Window and Door Inc. COUNCIL ACTION: A T D Comments: • 9. RESIDENTS REQUESTS AND COMMENTS FROM THE FLOOR Citizens'comments are encouraged to allow individual citizens to address the Council,as a whole,on a matter of interest or concern to the citizens. The preservation of the Citizens'Comments item on the agenda is important in order to encourage and maintain this information flow. To preserve and protect this valuable communications link a speaker is limited to three(3)minutes. :::� ,' '..:;:>':'�:::: `:::t� 4tsar `: .:::..........................................:.:::.�.......::::::::......: 10. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7:05 p.m. Consideration of Adoption of Resolution 5005 Denying a Conditional Use Permit Request for the New Apostolic Church to Construct a Church Facility at 3025 County Road H; Planning Case No. 452-96. Consideration of Resolution 5007 Approving a Conditional Use Permit Request for the New Apostolic Church to Construct a Church Facility at 3025 County Road H;Planning Case No. 452-96. Staff Report No. 96-1879C. (Staff Presenter:Pam Sheldon, Community Development Director) AGENDA PAGE FOUR OCTOBER 29, 1996 COUNCIL ACTION: A T D Comments: 11. COUNCIL BUSINESS: A. Consideration of Adoption of Resolution 5006 Denying a Development Review for the New Apostolic Church to Construct a Church Facility at 3025 County Road H;Planning Case No. 452-96. Consideration of Resolution 5008 Approving a Development Review for the New Apostolic Church to Construct a Church Facility at 3025 County Road H;Planning Case No. 452-96. Staff Report No. 96- 1880C. (Staff Presenter:Pam Sheldon, Community Development Director) COUNCIL ACTION: A T D • Comments: B. Consideration of the Adoption of Ordinance No. 96-591 Related to Licensing, Amending Title 500, Chapter 502 and 503, Sections 502.03, 502.06, 502.07, 503.03, 503.06 and 503.07 by Adding New Subdivisions to the Mounds View Municipal Code. Staff Report No. 96-1881C. (Staff Presenter:Bob Long, City Attorney) COUNCIL ACTION: A TD Comments: ROLL CALL VOTE Mayor Linke Councilmember Trude Councilmember Blanchard Councilmember Hankner Councilmember Quick AGENDA PAGE FIVE 1116 OCTOBER 29, 1996 COUNCIL ACTION: A T D Comments: C. Presentation of Proposed 1997 City Budget. (Staff Presenters:Bruce Kessel, Finance Director; Chuck Whiting, City Administrator;Mayor Jerry Linke and Council) COUNCIL ACTION: A T D Comments: 12. REPORTS • 1. Report of Councilmembers: Trude: Hankner: Blanchard: Quick: 2. Report of Mayor Linke: 3. Report of Administrator: 4. Report of Staff: 5. Report of Attorney: AGENDA PAGE SIX OCTOBER 29, 1996 NEXT COUNCIL WORK SESSION: NOVEMBER 4, 1996 NEXT COUNCIL MEETING: NOVEMBER 12, 1996 13. ADJOURNMENT • APPFUIVED Page 1 • September 23, 1996 Mounds View City Council PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY,MINNESOTA Regular Meeting September 23, 1996 Mounds View City Hall 2401 Hwy. 10,Mounds View,MN 55112 CALL TO ORDER The Mounds View City Council was called to order by Mayor Linke at 7:00 p.m. on September 23, 1996. • PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Linke, Council members Trude, Blanchard,Quick and Hankner ALSO PRESENT: Chuck Whiting,City Administrator Pamela Sheldon,Community Development Director Cathy Bennett,Economic Development Coordinator Bob Long,City Attorney ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA: • Mr. Whiting,Clerk Administrator,asked that one item be added to the Agenda,Council Business, 11(N) Consideration of Resolution No.5021,Commending the Mounds View Election Judges and Intern Deputy Clerk,Dawn Weitzel,for their conduct at the September 10, 1996 Primary Election. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: a. September 9, 1996 Regular City Council Meeting. • MOTION/SECOND: Trude/Blanchard to approve the minutes of the September 9, 1996 Regular City 41110 •Council Meeting as presented. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried Page 2 September 23, 1996 • Mounds View City Council ACCEPTANCE OF ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTES: There were no Advisory Commission Minutes for consideration at this meeting. CONSENT AGENDA: Mr.Whiting,City Administrator read the Consent Agenda as follows: A. Approval of Resolution No. 5015,Approving Just and Correct Claims Against City Funds. B. Set Public Hearing for 7:05 p.m.,Monday,October 28, 1996 to consider a Conditional Use Permit and Development Review for the New Apostolic Church at 3025 County Road H. C. Set Public Hearing for 7:05 p.m.,Monday,October 14, 1996 to Consider an Ordinance Relating to Licensing,Amending Title 500,Chapter 502 and 503,Sections 502.03, 502.06,502.07,503.03,503.06 and 503.07 by Adding New Subdivisions to the Mounds View Municipal Code. D. Approval of Resolution No. 5013,Wage Adjustment for Dawn Weitzel,Administrative Inter/Interim • Deputy Clerk. E. Licenses for Approval: • General(Commercial)-New Bridges Leasing Co. Fed Tech,Inc. Masonry M.J.Arndt Construction Co. HVAC Associated HVAC,Inc.-Renewal Sun Mechanical-Renewal Clarion Contracting-New Fireplace Showroom-New Thirty-Twenty Manufactured Home Sales-New Sewer/Water Glenn Rehbein Excavating,Inc.-Renewal J.B.Diggers,Inc.-New Asphalt Bituminous Roadways,Inc.-Renewal Webster Company,Inc.-Renewal Blacktop Paving of MN, Inc.-New • Page 3 • September 23, 1996 Mounds View City Council Mayor Linke asked that Item(B)be removed from the Consent Agenda until the Council establishes the date for the second Council meeting in October. MOTION/SECOND: Hankner/Blanchard to approve the Consent Agenda as AMENDED. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried Mayor Linke asked that Item(L)under Council Business be brought forward for consideration so that the Council can act on Item(B)for the Consent Agenda. COUNCIL BUSINESS L. Consideration to Reschedule October 7, 1996 Work Session to September 30, 1996. Along with this,Mayor Linke noted that staff is asking the Council to consider moving the Regular Council meeting of October 28, 1996 to Tuesday,October 29,1996. MOTION/SECOND: Hankner/Quick to reschedule the October 7, 1996 Work Session to September 30, 1996 and the Regular Council Meeting from October 28, 1996 to October 29, 1996. • VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried CONSENT AGENDA: continued MOTION/SECOND: Linke/Hankner to set the Public Hearing for 7:05 p.m.,Tuesday,October 29, 1996 to Consider a Conditional Use Permit and Development Review for the New Apostolic Church at 3025 County Road H. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried RESIDENTS REQUESTS AND COMMENTS FROM THE FLOOR. Mayor Linke explained that this portion of the meeting was designated for anyone who wished to speak to the Council on items that were not on the Agenda. • There were no questions or comments from the floor. PUBLIC HEARINGS: Public Hearing Considering Adoption of Ordinance No.583,An Ordinance Relating to Therapeutic Massage License Regulation: Amending Title 500 of the Mounds View Municipal Code by Adding a New Chapter 514. Mayor Linke opened the Public Hearing at 7:12 p.m. • Mr. Whiting noted that this item was reviewed by the Council at the last meeting. There have been no calls or complaints to date in regard to the adoption of this ordinance. Page 4 September 23, 1996 • Mounds View City Council Mayor Linke closed the Public Hearing at 7:13 p.m. COUNCIL BUSINESS: A. Consideration of Ordinance No.583,An Ordinance Relating to Therapeutic Massage License Regulation: Amending Title 500 of the Mounds View Municipal Code by Adding a New Chapter 514. MOTION/SECOND: Trude/Hankner to Approve the Adoption of Ordinance No. 583,An Ordinance Relating to Therapeutic Massage License Regulation: Amending Title 500 of the Mounds View Municipal Code by Adding a New Chapter 514,and to Waive the Reading. ROLL CALL VOTE: Mayor Linke yes Council member Trude yes Council member Blanchard yes Council member Hankner yes Council member Quick yes Motion Carried 5-01111. B. Introduction of Ordinance Relating to Licensing,Amending Title 500,Chapter 502 and 503, Sections 502.03,502.06,502.07,503.03,503.06,503.07 by Adding New Subdivisions to the Mounds View Municipal Code. Ms.Cathy Bennett,Economic Development Coordinator,explained that to dispense alcohol for special events by non-profit groups and for private parties at the Bel-Rae,Ordinance No.96-591 creates a licensing procedure to regulate the use of alcohol on City property. This ordinance would require that a temporary liquor license be issued to current liquor license holders in the city or adjacent cities for each event that would be held on city property. The city would set a fee for the temporary license per resolution ,which will be brought forward at the next regular Council meeting. Ms.Bennett noted that in order to be eligible for a temporary license,the licensee must currently hold an intoxicating and/or non-intoxicating liquor license with the City of Mounds View or an adjacent city. Additionally,the temporary license holder must hold an insurance policy for$1 million dollars and name the City of Mounds View as an additional insured on that policy. 'Ms.Bennett noted that this was the formal introduction of Ordinance No.96-591,and the final reading and Public Hearing is scheduled for October 14, 1996. Ms.Hankner asked if this would cover all city owned property. Mr.Long,City Attorney,explained that this ordinance would basically give the City the legal ability or mechanism to grant a temporary liquor license for an event on city owned property if this was their desire. However,each event would require separate Council action. 111 Page 5 September 23, 1996 Mounds View City Council MOTION/SECOND: Trude/Blanchard to Approve the Introduction of Ordinance No.96-591,Relating to Licensing,Amending Title 500,Chapter 502 and 503,Sections 502.03,502.06,502.07,503.03,503.06 and 503.07 by Adding New Subdivisions to the Mounds View Municipal Code. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried C. Consideration of Resolution No.5011,Authorizing Acquisition of Real Property. Ms.Bennett explained that currently the Mounds View Economic Development Authority owns the Bel Rae building. The EDA is a separate corporate body,legally and politically,from the City of Mounds View. City Attorney,Bob Long,has recommended that the City legally acquire the property to enable full authority when managing and administering recreation programs and special and private events. By having the same entity own and operate the facility,double liability exposure is not an issue. Mr.Long has prepared a Quit Claim Deed which would transfer ownership to the City of Mounds View,per approval of the resolution. MOTION/SECOND: Trude/Blanchard to Approve Resolution No.5011,Authorizing Acquisition of Real Property. • VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried D. Consideration of Resolution No.5004,Approving a Minor Subdivision to Create Two Lots for Erik Anderson at 8021 Eastwood Road. Ms.Pam Sheldon,Community Development Director,explained that Mr.Anderson is requesting a minor subdivision to create two lots from property located at 8021 Eastwood Road. She noted that property in an R-1 district must be a minimum of 75 feet wide and 11,000 square feet;both properties as proposed would meet these requirements. The applicant has paid the$100.00 Park Dedication Fee and the Planning Commission has recommended approval of the subdivision. MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Hankner to Approve Resolution No.5004,Approving a Minor Subdivision to Create Two Lots for Erik Anderson at 8021 Eastwood Road. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried E. Consideration of Resolution No.5009 Initiating Eminent Domain Proceedings and the Use of Quick Take Process Under Chapter 117 of the Minnesota State Statutes for an Easement on a • Portion of the Property Located at 2535-2585 Highway 10 and Identified by PIN#07-30-23-11-0079 for Construction of a Pedestrian Bridge Over Highway 10. Ms. Sheldon noted that obtaining easements from adjacent property owners is one of the steps necessary to allow for the construction of the pedestrian bridge over Highway 10. One of the easements is for the bridge abutment on the North side of the highway on the Mounds View Square shopping center property. Staff has been working with the owners to obtain this easement. The owners, in exchange,have asked for a sign variance and the addition of square footage to the shopping center. Page 6 September 23, 1996 Mounds View City Council Mr.Long, City Attorney has informed staff that the owners would need to go through the normal process of a variance approval. To assure that the easement will be obtained within the necessary time frame,the City Council will need to initiate eminent domain proceedings for acquiring the easement through a 90-day "quick take"process. MOTION/SECOND: Trude/Blanchard to Approve Resolution No.5009,Initiating Eminent Domain Proceedings and the Use of Quick Take Process Under Chapter 117 of the Minnesota State Statutes for an Easement on a Portion of the Property Located at 2535-2585 Highway 10 and Identified by PIN#07-30- 23-11-0079 for Construction of a Pedestrian Bridge Over Highway 10. VOTE: 3 ayes 2 nays(Hankner/Quick) Motion Carried F. Consideration of Resolution 5010 Electing to Continue Participation in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program Under the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act. Ms. Sheldon explained that this Resolution will renew Mounds View's commitment to participate in the program and will enable the city to ask for grant funding under a number of different programs. MOTION/SECOND: Trude/Hankner to Approve Resolution No.5010,Electing to Continue Participation in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program Under the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act. • VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried G. Consideration of Purchase of Two Tax Forfeited Properties. Ms. Sheldon explained that the City has been notified that two contiguous properties are up for tax forfeiture. The city has in the past purchased property in this area and it is staffs feeling that purchasing the additional lots could present a possibility of completing some redevelopment under the housing replacement program. The property could be purchased using tax increment financing that is available to the city. MOTION/SECOND: Hankner/Quick to recommend to the Economic Development Administration approval of purchasing the two tax forfeited properties for the Housing Replacement Program. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried H. Consideration of Resolution Numbers 5016 and 5017 Consenting to the Transfer of Control of and Certain Ownership Interests in a Cable Television Franchise to Continental Cable and U S West. Mr.Whiting explained that he received notification of the pending transfer of Meredith Cable to Continental Cable and U S West. Ms.Trude noted that rates will not be increased as a result of the transfer,nor will programs or customer ' service be affected. MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Trude to Approve Resolutions 5016 and 5017 Consenting to the Transfer of • Control of and Certain Ownership Interests in a Cable Television Franchise to Continental Cable and U S • Page 7 September 23, 1996 Mounds View City Council West. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried I. Consideration of Resolution No.5019 Approving Participation in Financing,Construction and Operation of a Four Sheet Ice Facility. Mr. Whiting explained that the City of Mounds View has been working with three other communities in regard to the proposed construction of the Quad Ice Rink at the National Sports Center in Blaine. Last week,the City of Shoreview approved a resolution to participate, subject to a number of conditions. Resolution 5019 would approve the City of Mounds View's participation in financing,construction and operation of the four sheet ice facility,based upon the following contingencies: 1) Approval of the Master Agreement between the MASC and all of the participating communities; 2) Approval of a supplemental Agreement,including a$500,000 escrow,between the cities of Mounds View,Arden Hills,New Brighton and Shoreview and the Mounds View and Irondale Youth Hockey Associations; 3) Approval of a supplemental Agreement between the cities of Mounds View,Arden Hills,New Brighton and Shoreview and Ramsey County which includes the County's$500,000 capital contribution for the • project; 4) Review of the final agreements by the City's Finance Director and financial advisor to determine that there will be no negative impact to the City's bond rating; 5) Participation in the project by the cities of Arden Hills,New Brighton and Shoreview;and 6) Financial commitment from communities for all four sheets of ice at the National Sports Center. MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Hankner to Approve Resolution No.5019,Approving Participation in Financing,Construction and Operation of a Four Sheet Ice Facility. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried J. Consideration of Resolution No.5012,Approving the Hire of a Planning Associate. Mr. Whiting explained that interviews were held for the top candidates for the Planning Associate position and staff is recommending that the position be offered to James Ericson. Mr.Ericson has been working as an Assistant Planner for the City of Maplewood for the past year and prior to that time served as a Planning Intern for the City of St.Paul for one year. It is staffs feeling that Mr.Ericson's work experience is very applicable for this position. MOTION/SECOND: Trude/Blanchard to Approve Resolution No. 5012,Approving the Hire of James Ericson as Planning Associate. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried K. Consideration of Resolution No.5014,Appointing the Clerk Administrator as Voting Delegate • for the City of Mounds View at the Annual Business Meeting of the National League of Cities. Page 8 September 23, 1996 • Mounds View City Council MOTION/SECOND: Linke/Quick to Approve Resolution No.5014,Appointing the Clerk Administrator as Voting Delegate for the City of Mounds View at the Annual Business Meeting of the National League of Cities. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried L. (This item was considered immediately after approval of the Consent Agenda.) M. Review of the Bel Rae Survey Status and Scheduling of a Fall Public Meeting. • Mr.Whiting asked that the Council establish a public meeting date for review of the survey and the options for the Bel Rae property. MOTION/SECOND: Linke/Trude to Set a Public Meeting for Review of the Survey and Options for the Bel Rae Property on Monday,October 14, 1996. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried N. Resolution No.5021,Commending the Election Judges and Dawn Weitzel,Interim Deputy Clerk on their Conduct During the September 10, 1996 Primary Election. • Mr.Whiting noted that he was very pleased with how the September 10th election was handled. MOTION/SECOND: Blanchard/Trude to Approve Resolution NO. 5021,Commending the Election Judges and Dawn Weitzel,Interim Deputy Clerk on their Conduct During the September 10, 1996 Primary Election. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried REPORTS: Report of Council members: Trude: Ms.Trude stated she had attended the Airport Control Tower Ribbon Cutting Ceremony and the tower will be staffed on October 1st. She noted that anyone interested in touring the facility can do so on Wednesday,September 25th. Ms.Trude stated she has served as city representative on the Arsenal Committee and was contacted by the Arden Hills mayor who is asking for the support of surrounding communities in their work with the National Guard MOTION/SECOND: Trude/Linke that the Mounds View City Council support the City of Arden Hills request in locating a city facility on the arsenal land and also asking Arden Hills to continue to support Mounds View's request for a joint shared municipal athletic field. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried • • Page 9 September 23, 1996 Mounds View City Council Blanchard: No report. Quick: No report. Hankner: Ms.Hankner read a letter,resigning from her position on the Mounds View City Council, effective December 31, 1996. MOTION/SECOND: Linke/Blanchard to accept Ms.Hankner's letter of resignation. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried Mayor Linke stated per the Charter,the candidate with the third highest number of votes will fill the position. He needs to know if the ballots should read"Vote for Two"or"Vote for Three". Mr.Long recommended that the Council take action,declaring that a vacancy will occur and it will be filled at the next election. MOTION/SECOND: Linke/Hankner to recognize that a vacancy will be occurring on the Mounds View City Council,and announce that it will be filled at the next general election. Mr.Duane McCarty, 8060 Long Lake Road,stated according to the Charter,a vacancy must occur prior to the election. If she resigns on December 31st,technically under the Charter requirement,someone could • sue the city for a Special Election. Mr.Long explained that as long as the resignation is irrevocable, the State Statutes clearly provides for the Council to acknowledge the vacancy to occur. The Charter provisions are being followed,but the Charter does not define when the vacancy occurs. The State law gives guidance as to the council's acceptance of the resignation. Ms.Hankner stated her goal was to avoid a Special Election at an additional cost to the taxpayers and still allow for continuity through the budget process for 1996. Mr. McCarty argued that the Charter very distinctively recognizes when vacancies occur. VOTE: 4 ayes 0 nays 1 Abstain(Trude) Motion Carried Report of Mayor Linke: No report. Report of Administrator: No report. Report of Staff: No report. Report of Attorney: No report. Mayor Linke noted that the next Council Work Session will be held on September 30, 1996. The next Regular Council Meeting will be on October 14, 1996. Mayor Linke adjourned the meeting at 8:30 p.m. • Res e tfully submitted, Tamara D. Sae e Recording Secretary MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL MEETING (( Severlitbe,r- Z3, 16/9& 410 Please sign Please Prin± NAME ADDRESS t P e3 -SGA m 7— ll i/4T`i) E_ rn i[ Luso td S ho re e(4., a.ra1, Dusd(d 1.42_,ef,, i,iils)e>0.--c/t--- 3 -1,a_u_xp G1_,/ , 0.if (.1fix__0_ 4eVO 1101A Q2 --Thn, 6r1,776/,‘2., 0/4,b() 7-a-A7 L a A•7 7/ /1/I Z/ 1" 19 U Rpt )4 L-7-ag4�0.z. - e ,Oily --"(A(Off_,C1.5 fe\C')C Q\„9 i e 1-4-2 iteroltiPAA/i/ PLert..t.A4.4/(jzico (10,ROn A AMA/ -N yot•si nec,k4,..A._<_,d‘t, ---- 4-7rO/ - ,t 1 41! ( '( %, t�♦ r 7---7 (../1/")!/710, .., k- ---,-A 1 f---74.—, 4)-e--L. C.-/f16_,2--/(4_.."--r.-?_,C, / 72r � _.�./�. _e M -Av o S v i i...4..) r--/S41, A.(-Li- -7, It 0/I lej lti. IlltO. 0347 g.06,0 ,/coa...,,j-IC A-L 'J 8G ( -3?57 .t�j� . 73 ,1k/t VI w T P.tG g/e n) - L f/' 47 c•.z, r7 f, %`!5`c.1 /3/1-L/' --" //?-__ 0/(t1-1i 8//62.12 L '--tom C legit K V' i.-' �. z , V /I 1- e v`l✓11 ,3O « ` ' /1 CITY OF REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION Agenda Section REPORT Report Number: oIFi1f% I ISTAFF �� IDS Report Date: 10/24/96 CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE - OEN 10-29-96 .— s Special Order of Bus. v''ess•PartnetS' X Consent Agenda Public Hearings Council Business Item Description: Surplus of Equipment Administrator's Review/Recommendation: -No Comments to supplement this report -Comments attached. Explanation/Summary (attach supplement sheets as necessary) Summary: A number of items have been identified as obsolete or in disrepair and no longer functional . An inventory of the items are listed below. 2 Floppy Drive Computer & Printer- No Fixed Asset Number - S/N 100867V sixnitor Mono Chrome - No Fixed Asset Number - S/N 4476823 ed Asset Number 7010-4200-0146 - Typewriter Fixed Asset Number 7010-4200-3016 - Printer Fixed Asset Number 7010-4150-0001 - Printer Fixed Asset Number 000815 Columbia Par Car It is requested that these items be declared surplus and/or sold and discarded. Kitty Hickok COMMENDATION: g mf or CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW Agenda Section REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION Report Number: (�11 PD STAFF REPORT Report Date: 10/25/96 0 COUNCIL MEETING MEETING DATE — , [ .cw _ Special Order of Bus. m '' eat•Partner''* October 25, 1996 X Consent Agenda Public Hearings — Council Business Item Description: Comments Relating to Surplus Property Disposal Executive Director's Review/Recommendation: -No Comments to supplement this report -Comments attached. Explanation/Summary(attach supplement sheets as necessary) Summary: I would like to note to the City Council my preference for the manner in which the City disposes of surplus property. I have always found it to be in the City's best interest to dispose of surplus property, particularly . where there is likely interest in a piece of property,to turn the disposal over to an auction house. This will do two things, first staff does not have to take time oversee a bidding situation, and second, the perception of fairness is much easier to maintain in such a setting than it is if bids are taken internally. Going to an auction house will require the City give a cut to the auction house. Unless the Council prefers otherwise, this is my preference for disposing of surplus and I would like to consider it the administrative policy of the City. C(12€'11 . buck Whiting, City Ad .nistrator RECOMMENDATION: MEMO TO: CHUCK WHITING IP FROM: MARY SAARION 0 DATE: SEPTEMBER 23, 1996 • SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR SURPLUS MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT TO BE ADVERTISED FOR BEST BID SALE There are several items at the Bel Rae that are taking up space and will not be used because of . alcohol advertising or because of lack of need. I request that these items be approved as surplus items to be advertised for sale at the best offered price. The list of items at this time are as follows: 1 - Pabst Beer Wall hanging Clock 1 - Miller Lite Wall hanging Clock 1- Miller Lite Hanging Lamp Lite (for over a game table) 1 - Time Clock System Steel Gate for a doorway 1 -Large restaurant size stainless steel meat slicer 1 - Stainless Steel Large Lettuce Slicer • 2 - Schmidt Beer condiment holders 1 -very old cash register(don't know that it works, but looks like an antique!) 1 - electronic Casio 2112 ER cash register 1 - DPM electronic cash register 1 - Safe - Sentary Valueguard 1380 100 or more plastic ashtrays 100 or more glass ashtrays 100 or more plastic Michalob serving trays 1 Electronic coat rack 1 neon hamburger sign Miscellaneous old furniture: old couch, old chairs, stools, metal storage cabinet, plastic rubber plant in pot. There are sure to be other surplus items found which will be requested to be classified as surplus at a later date. III ei-wr cr CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW Agenda Section 5D REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION Report Number: qo 332c (Dij `>`•`ri'`''` STAFF REPORT Report Date: 10/25/96 0 h ;+ COUNCIL MEETING MEETING DATE •,,, _ Special Order of Bus. ''mess`PastnoO'lti October 25, 1996 X Consent Agenda Public Hearings Council Business Item Description: Resolution No. 5032 Approving the Reclassification of the Position of EDA Coordinator to EDA Director Executive Director's Review/Recommendation: -No Comments to supplement this report -Comments attached. Explanation/Summary(attach supplement sheets as necessary) Summary: During budget workshops this past summer, I proposed a general outline for reorganizing the administrative and finance departments. My objective has been to combine the finance and administration departments under the finance director as department head and eliminating the clerk administrator as administration department head. The first action was not to replace Michelle Chambers in the deputy clerk position and spread her responsibilities to Lynette Morgan and Dawn Weitzel. Then Bruce Kessel was hired as Finance Director. The next step was to evaluate the work needs of the office. I concluded that the intern position should not be changed to administrative assistant as had been done in the past, but instead the Economic Development Coordinator position should be changed to director level status with added responsibilities of ssisting the City Administrator. The resolution before the Council here authorizes that change. 0 Enclosed is a new job description for Economic Development Director. Apparently the Council has in the past shifted the responsibility of EDA executive (the person authorized to sign in the name of the EDA) from the administrator to the EDA Coordinator. This rather significant duty is now included in the proposed job description. I have also included verbage for the EDA Director to act in the administrative capacity of the City Administrator in his absense, plus I intend to have this position take on added personnel oversight and involvement, similar to the normal role of the City Administrator. I feel this will not only strenghten Cathy Bennett's management skills, but provide a clearer and stronger management team for leadership issues within the •organization. Because much of these duties are already taking place, I am requesting the Council consider this action effective October 1 of 1996 with a wage adjustment to Step 2. The Council may also recall that my intention was to have this action come before the Council earlier than this. I have been waiting for PDI to determine the appropriate compworth points for this position and for the administrative aide position. Because that has not come, and this position is currently assuming the responsibilities I have laid out above,I will still request the resolution be adopted with the understanding that a minor adjustment may be needed after the PDI study is complete. c. ..".(7 r.)::1; _ Chuck Whiting, City dministrator COMMENDATION: Council action to approve Resolution No. 5032 • Page Two Staff Report, October 29, 1996 City Council Meeting The steps proposed are as follows: Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 $44,544 $47,328 $50,112 $52,896 $55,680 These steps bring this position in line with the other department head positions. • 111 CZif,:3F REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION Agenda Section Ij i-7;r6 STAFF REPORT Report Number: t14 .-/?7QC I I CO ijfilPi i CZ Report Date: 10/10/96 CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE 0 " '`.f�Y' October 29, 1996 .R Special Order of Bus. '°8ietzD• ATE 0p Consent Agenda X Public Hearings Council Business Item Description: Consideration of adoption of Resolution No. 5005 denying a conditional use permit request for the New Apostolic Church to construct a church facility at 3025 County Road H; and Consideration of adoption of Resolution No. 5007 approving a conditional use permit request for the New Apostolic Church to construct a church facility at 3025 County Road H; Planning Case No. 452-96 Administrator's Review/Recommendation: - -No Comments to supplement this report -Comments attached. Explanation/Summary(attach supplement sheets as necessary) Summary: Stahl Construction, on behalf of the New Apostolic Church has submitted an application for a conditional use permit to allow a church in an R-1 Zoning District. The proposal is for a 4050 square foot structure, with a 2025 square foot main level containing a foyer, auditorium for church services, sacristy, mothers room, and an elevator. The lower level is also 2025 square feet, and has a fellowship hall, kitchen, restrooms, elevator and a 0 mechanical room. One and one-half stories are exposed above ground. The auditorium contains 20 pews, each nine feet in length. The Zoning Code states that in churches furnished with pews, each twenty two inches (22") shall be counted as one seat. Based on this method, the proposed church will seat 98 people. The proposed church facility meets all of the City's dimensional requirements and requires no variances in order to proceed. These dimensional requirements are as follows: Required Provided , Met/Not Met Lot Area(1) 12,500 s.f. 22,520 s.f. yes Lot Width 100 100 yes Building Height 2.5 stories; 45 feet 26'9"to ridge yes 21'6"to midpoint Steeple No limit 15'from roofline yes Building Setbacks (1) Front 35 35 yes(2) Side 30 30 yes Rear 30 40 yes Parking Lot Setbacks (1) 5' 10-23' yes Parking(1) 1 space per 4 seats 25 + yes 98 seats =25 2 handicapped Compact Parking Allowed no more than 10%=3 2 yes (1)The City Council may increase these requirements as a condition of permit approval. • (2)The front setback is being measured from Pleasant View Drive,rather than from County Road H as was the IIIcase in the original submittal. Mayor and City Council Planning Case No. 452-96: New Apostolic Church (Conditional Use Permit) October 10, 1996 Page 2 1111 The plan before City Council has been revised from the one acted upon by the Planning Commission. The changes are as follows: • The amount of seating has been reduced from 115 to.98 spaces • The amount of parking has been reduced from 29 spaces to 27 spaces • The width of the buffer along the east end of the north property line has been widened from 10 feet to 19 feet. The buffer along the north property line now varies from 15 feet to 24 feet and then to 19 feet. • The width of the buffer along the east property line has been widened from 10 feet to 12 feet. • The understanding at the time of the Planning Commission hearing was that the building was 26.5 to 29.5 feet above grade. The elevations which were submitted were incorrect, and our current understanding is that the building is 26'3" to 26'9" in height. The steeple is shown at 15 feet on the elevations, although the applicant has told staff that the steeple will be 9 feet in height. • The driveway onto County Road H has been moved to the west, and it is staff's understanding that the driveway is now acceptable to the Fire Marshall for emergency access. Staff has requested the applicant to provide a letter to this effect. • Modifications have been made to the landscaping plan in terms of amount and type of plant materials. Some of the existing trees expected to be removed, can now be retained with the wider buffer along the north property line. The property at County Road H is zoned R-1. The Mounds View Zoning Code allows for churches in residential districts with approval of a conditional use permit. "The purpose of a conditional use permit i provide the City with a reasonable degree of discretion in determining the suitability of certain designate uses upon the general welfare, public health and safety. " (Section 1125.01 Subd. 3.) Attached you will find a letter from the City Attorney, dated August 30, 1996, addressing the role of the City Council and Planning Commission in granting conditional use permits and the amount of discretion the City Council has in making this decision. Conditional uses are distinguished from permitted uses for a reason. These uses are subject to greater scrutiny because they have the potential for greater impacts than the permitted uses in a given district. The criteria for granting conditional use permits are intended to assess, in part, the suitability and compatibility of such uses with adjacent permitted uses. There are two sets of criteria which apply to approval of a conditional use permit for churches: Sections 1125.01 Subd. 3.b. and 1106.04 Subd. 1. These criteria are noted below with comments on whether the criteria have been met. The criteria have been grouped, in some cases, to avoid repetitive discussion. • Section 1125.01 Subd. 3.b. Criteria (1), (7), (8), and (4) appear to be met. Staff will comment on criteria (6) at the October 29 meeting. Criteria (2), (3) and (5) require City Council to exercise judgement on the degree to which this use is compatible with adjacent residential properties or has been adequately separated by distance or screening such that existing homes will not be depreciated in value or be adversely effected. (1) The use will not create an excessive burden on existing parks, schools, streets and other public facilities and utilities will serve or are proposed to serve the area. (7) The use will not cause traffic hazards or congestion. (8) Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and necessary facilities have been or will be provided. The New Apostolic Church proposes to hold Sunday School at 8:45-9:30 AM, two Sunday church services at 10:00-11:00 AM and 5:00-6:00 PM, and a Wednesday evening service from 8:00-9:00 PM. The maximum ft d City Council Planning Case No. 452-96: New Apostolic Church (Conditional Use Permit) October 10, 1996 Page 3 III seating in the church is 98 people; the current congregation is 55 people. Because the use is a church, rather than residential homes, it is not anticipated to create a demand on parks or schools. Both water and sewer service adequate to support this use is available to the site. The site is served by two streets, County Road H and Pleasant View Drive. Given the limited number of services and the size of the congregation, the amount of traffic is anticipated to be low and will occur on weekends or evenings rather than during peak commute times. The City Engineer has reviewed the applicant's drainage proposal and indicated that the rate of runoff should not be a problem and the grass treatment areas will provide enough water quality treatment. Drainage will now be directed to County Road H and will flow through grassed areas to allow sediments to percolate before runoff water leaves the site. The Rice Creek Watershed District has indicated to staff that a permit from them is not required. (4) The use, in the opinion of the City Council, is reasonably related to the overall needs of the City and to the existing land use. (6) The use is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. The Zoning Code does envision the development of churches in residential neighborhoods, and there are five other churches in Mounds View. The applicant has testified that a number of the members of this church are from the Mounds View area, and desire to locate the church closer to their homes. Present day staff is not amiliar enough with the City's Comprehensive Plan to comment on whether this use is in conflict with its als and policies, but will be prepared to address this issue at the City Council meeting on October 29. (2) The use will be sufficiently compatible or separated by distance or screening from adjacent residentially zoned or used land so that existing homes will not be depreciated in value and there will be no deterrence to development of vacant land. (3) The structure and site shall have an appearance that will not have an adverse effect upon adjacent residential properties. (5) The use is consistent with the purposes of the Zoning Code and the purposes of the zoning district in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use. According to the Zoning Code, "the purpose of the R-1, single family district is to provide for low density single-family detached residential dwelling units and directly related, complementary uses." Churches are allowed in all residential districts in Mounds View, and one could conclude from this allowance that they are regarded as complementary uses. They require, however, approval of a conditional use permit. The conditional use permit process requires a public hearing be held by the City Council before making its decision, and that property owners within 350 feet of the site be notified. Churches, therefore, are regarded as complementary uses which require special, discretionary review. The R-1 district is intended for low density, i.e. low intensity uses. The difficulty presented by the applicant's proposal is the size of the structure and parking lot, in contrast to the typical pattern of development on residential lots in this neighborhood. Most of the homes on Pleasant View Drive and elsewhere in the neighborhood are single story residences, estimated at 1200-1400 square feet in size, set on wooded lots. The proposed church is 1-1/2 stories, with a footprint of 2025 square feet. Many of the existing mature trees in the center of the lot will be cleared. New landscaping is proposed around the perimeter of the site which in time will mature. It is possible to develop a 211 1 square foot home on a lot in this neighborhood. It just is not usual situation in the immediate vicinity, Illr is having a parking lot a usual improvement in a residential district. The site will look much more barren an it does now if the church is built until the landscaping grows. Mayor and City Council Planning Case No. 452-96: New Apostolic Church (Conditional Use Permit) October 10, 1996 Page 4 III Whether there is sufficient distance or screening is discussed later under the criteria from the R-1 district under the section on screening, buffering and landscaping on Page 7. Section 1106.04 Subd. 1. Criteria a., b., c.(1)-(5) and e. appear to be met. Criteria c.(6), d. and f. require City Council to exercise judgement on whether the fencing and screening is sufficient to adequately shield the church from abutting properties, the parking lot is adequately screened and landscaped from surrounding and abutting residential uses, and the use meets the criteria in 1125.01 Subd. 1.e. a. Front yard depths shall be a minimum of thirty five feet (35'). b. Side yards shall be no less than thirty feet (30'). Complies; Pleasant View Drive is being used as the front of the lot for purposes of setbacks. c. Adequate screening from abutting residential uses and landscaping is provided in compliance with Section 1103.08 of this Title. (A copy of this Section is attached, and paraphrased below.) (1) No fence shall exceed 8 feet. (2) No fences, structures or planting of trees in sight triangle. (3) Fences not to exceed 48"allowed any where on lot;fences not to exceed 96"may be erected behind the front line of the principal building. (4) Fences shall be constructed so surface adjoining adjacent properties and rights-of-way are finished construction. (5) Landscaping required in areas remaining after providing for off street parking, off-street loading, sidewalks and driveways, a building site. (6) Fencing and screening shall consist of either a fence or a green belt planting strip the height of which shall be sufficient to adequately shield the activity from the abutting properties. a. Greenbelt planting strip shall consist of evergreens of sufficient width and density to provide effective screen;planting strip shall contain no structures or other use;planting strips shall be not less than 8 feet in height; earth mounding may be used but limited to no more than 5 feet;planting plan subject to approval of Planning Commission based on recommendation from staff b. Required screening fence shall be masonry, brick, wood of steel not less than 6 feet or more than 8 feet;subject to approval by Planning Commission based on recommendation from staff. c. Ground cover shall be established within one year following issuance of building permit;must control erosion. Complies with 1103.08 Subd. 1-5, except there are five existing trees in the sight triangle. The applicant has shown two of these remaining. If the branch structure is high enough, they will not pose a sight distance problem. A contingency has been included that either the trees be removed or trimmed to prevent a site distance problem. All areas of the property other than the parking area, building site and walkways are proposed to be landscaped. No fencing is proposed. Subd. 6 is discussed below in the section on screening, buffering and landscaping on page 7. d. Adequate off-street parking and access is provided on the site or on lots directly abutting or directly across a public street to the principal use in compliance with Chapter 1121 of this Title and that such parking is adequately screened and landscaped from surrounding and abutting residential uses in compliance with Section 1103.08 of this Title. ipe. Adequate off-street loading and service entrances are provided and regulated where applicable by Chapter 1122 of this Title. There are two driveways serving the site: one from County Road H and one from Pleasant View Drive. The driveway onto County Road H is 21 feet wide and will be used for emergency vehicle access. The one on • Mayor and City Council Planning Case No. 452-96: New Apostolic Church (Conditional Use Permit) October 10, 1996 Page 5 leasant View Drive is twelve feet in width and needs to be signed as "Exit Only". There are 27 parking spaces provided (23 regular spaces, 2 handicapped, and 2 compact) which exceeds Code requirements as long as restrictions are placed on the use of the building so the church auditorium and fellowship hall are not used at the same time, and the capacity of the auditorium is 98 seats. The size of the parking spaces meets Code requirements. It is staff's understanding that the Fire Department has stated the drive onto County Road H will be sufficient for emergency access, if the building is sprinklered. As noted earlier, we are expected a letter from the Fire Marshall confirming this information. Off-street loading is not required for this type of use or size of building. Finally, Chapter 1121 includes Subd. 12 which states "Required screening: All open, nonresidential, off-street parking area of five (5) or more spaces shall be screened and landscaped from abutting or surrounding residential districts in compliance with 1103.08(6) of this Title." This requirement is discussed under the section on screening, buffering and landscaping on page 7. f The provisions of subdivision 1125.01(1)e of this Title are considered and satisfactorily met (This section is quoted below.) Adverse Effects: The Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider possible adverse effects of the proposed amendment or conditional use. Its judgment shall be based upon (but not limited to)the following factors: (1) Relationship to the Municipal Comprehensive Plan 0 (2) The geographical area involved. (3) Whether such use will tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed. (4) The character of the surrounding area. (5) The demonstrated need for the use. As noted earlier, staff will be commenting on the relationship between this application and the Comprehensive Plan at your meeting on October 29. Whether the proposal fits into the character of the area, and whether it will tend to depreciate the surrounding area is an issue. Neighbors from the vicinity have attended the hearings and testified that they are concerned-about what they see as a lack of fit between this proposal and the character of the neighborhood. The applicant is proposing to place a 4,050 square foot building (with a 2,025 square foot footprint) on a single 22,500 square foot residential lot. Approximately 60% of the site will be in paving and building; 40% of the site will be in landscaping. The amount of paving is far greater than is the case with single family residential development. This proposal would result in the smallest site developed as a church in Mounds View (approximately 1/2 acre). The smallest existing site for a church in Mounds View is 1.59 acres (of three times as large) and the average site size is 3.7 acres. Although there appears to be agreement that a church does not devalue the surrounding residential properties per se, the nearby neighbors feel that a church and parking lot of this size placed on a single residential lot in a wooded, country- style neighborhood will devalue their properties. Approval of this proposal would set a new benchmark as to the site size and buffer widths which are acceptable to the community, below current conditions on church sites in Mounds View. The prevailing view on the Planning Commission is that the proposal is not compatible with this neighborhood. 4e applicant has testified of the difficulty encountered by his clients in trying to find vacant property which ld allow development of a church near to where most of the church members live. The church ngregation includes members who live in the Mounds View area. There appears to be a demonstrated need for the use. Mayor and City Council Planning Case No. 452-96: New Apostolic Church (Conditional Use Permit) October 10, 1996 Page 6 • Screening, Buffering and Landscaping There are a number of criteria which apply to this use concerning its compatibility with the surrounding residential properties and if adequate screening and buffering will be provided to shield the use and the parking lot from existing homes, and from surrounding and abutting uses. In this case, the surrounding and abutting uses are single family homes. These are the key issues in evaluating this proposal. The Code requires that accessory off-street parking shall be not less than five feet (5') from any lot line. (Section 1121.10 Subd. 3.) The Code also says in Section 1125.01 Subd. 3.c. "In permitting a new conditional use or the alteration of an existing conditional use, the City Council may impose, in addition to these standards and requirements expressly specified by[the Zoning Code], additional conditions which the City Council considers necessary to protect the best interest of the surrounding area and the community as a whole. These conditions may include, but are not limited to, the following: (1) Increasing the required lot size or yard dimensions. (2) Limiting the height, size or location of buildings. (3) Controlling the location and number of vehicle access points. (4) Increasing the street width. (5) Increasing the number of off-street parking spaces. (6) Limiting the number, size, location or lighting of signs. (7) Requiring diking,fencing, screening, landscaping or other facilities to protect adjacent and nearby property. (8) Designating sites for open space. III The applicant is proposing to provide a buffer area along the north and east property lines. (The west and south property lines abut streets.) The northern buffer varies in width, going from west to east, from 15 feet to 24 feet and then to 19 feet. This area has been widened from earlier plans reviewed by the Planning Commission, where the buffer was shown at 15, 24 and 10 feet. The property owner on the north side indicated at meetings before the Planning Commission that a buffer of at least 15 feet is needed in order for the buffer to be adequate. Staff has done a survey of other church sites in Mounds View as to the width of buffers between the church sites and abutting residential properties. They vary from 14 feet to 63 feet, with the typical width being 30 feet. The eastern buffer is 12 feet in width, which is also wider than the proposal reviewed by the Planning Commission (10 feet), but less than the minimum seen on other church sites in Mounds View. The house belonging to the property owner on the east side is approximately 60 feet from the common property line. There is an existing wooded area on the neighbor's property along the common property line. It is unknown if this property owner regards a buffer of 12 feet on the church property as adequate. The applicant has provided a double row of evergreen trees along the northern boundary, interspersed with lilacs and existing mature deciduous trees. (There are four trees between 10" and 24" in diameter shown as remaining along the northern property line. Extraordinary care must be exercised during construction if these trees are to survive.) They have also provided a row of evergreens along the eastern boundary anchored on either end by deciduous trees. III The Austrianine and Black Hills spruce are specified at 6 feet high; the lilacs at 3' high when installed. P P g g This is less than the eight feet required by the Code. Mayor and City Council Planning Case No. 452-96: New Apostolic Church (Conditional Use Permit) October 10, 1996 Page 7 ilke City Forester has reviewed the plan, and fords that it is sound and, in his judgement, will provide buffering to adjacent properties once the landscaping matures. (He indicated that evergreens typically grow one foot up and one foot out each year.) He suggested that White pine be substituted for Austrian pine at the northwest corner of the site, and along the eastern edge since White pine is more shade tolerant than Austrian pine. He also suggested that where Black Hills Spruce and the White or Austrian pines are planted together that they be spread further apart to allow for the differences in branching patterns. There is some difficulty with transplanting evergreens at eight feet, in order to get the height required by the Code. The City Forester has suggested that they be specified at 6-7 feet in the list of plant materials. These items have been addressed by contingencies in the attached resolutions. Summary of Screening, Landscaping and Buffering Issue: The prevailing view on the Planning Commission is that this proposal does not provide adequate buffering to adjacent properties, nor does it fit with the character of the surrounding neighborhood. The Planning Commission did not have an opportunity to review the revised plans which: • reduced the seating capacity from 115 to 98 seats • the number of parking spaces from 29 to 27 • corrected the height of the building from 29'6" to 26'9" above grade, and • changed the width of the buffers along the northern and eastern sides of the site. 0 aff would remark that the most recent plans include revisions which address buffering to the immediate ighbors in a more satisfactory way, and come closer to meeting the Code requirements. In comparison to other church sites in Mounds View, however, this church proposal is a much more intense use of a site and it would be the smallest church site in Mounds View. Planning Commission has had an ordinance amendment under consideration which would require a minimum one acre site for churches in residential districts, and buffers of at least 20' on sites having 2.5 acres or less, and 30' on sites having more than 2.5 acres in size. At their meeting on October 9, the Planning Commission forwarded this amendment to City Council with a recommendation for adoption. A survey done of other suburban communities indicated that requiring buffers of between 20 and 30 feet when parking lots for non-residential uses abut residential uses was typical. This amendment will be before City Council for public hearing and first reading on November 12. If it were adopted, the proposal for the New Apostolic Church would not meet Code requirements. If the proposal for the New Apostolic Church is approved as is, it would set a new standard as to what is acceptable for development of churches in Mounds View and could be used as a reference point in the evaluation of other proposals. This standard would be below current conditions on church sites in Mounds View. As is noted above, the City Council has the ability to impose conditions which would increase the required lot size or yard dimensions. Yard dimensions include the distance from parking lots to property lines. Sixty (or 120) Day Rule The proposal from the New Apostolic Church is under the 60-day rule, and staff has notified the applicant that the City is taking the option of extending that required time for decision by an additional 60 days as is allowed OMnnesota law. The application was received on July 15, 1996. One hundred and twenty days from that would be November 11. Therefore action must be taken by City Council at your meeting on October 29. The next City Council meeting will be on November 12, after the end of the 120 day period for decision. Mayor and City Council Planning Case No. 452-96: New Apostolic Church (Conditional Use Permit) October 10, 1996 Page 8 • Report Summary Because there are differing views on whether the proposal from the New Apostolic Church meets the criteria concerning compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood, the degree to which the proposal may devalue adjacent residential properties, and the need for adequate screening and buffering between the church use and adjacent uses, staff has prepared four resolutions for this case. Resolutions 5005 and 5007 deny the conditional use permit and development review for Planning Case No. 452-96. Resolutions 5006 and 5008 approve the conditional use permit and the development review for this case. The resolutions concerning the conditional use permit are attached to this report, and are under the public hearing item. The resolutions concerning the development review are attached to that report and appear on the agenda under Council Business. The conditional use permit process is used for uses which require greater scrutiny and could have adverse impacts. This process includes notification to surrounding property owners in order to obtain their input on the possible effect of the use. The testimony from the neighbors has been uniform and consistent that the proposal is too intense for the size of the site, and is out of character with the neighborhood. The survey done by staff of other church sites in Mounds View indicates that this proposal from the New Apostolic Church would become the smallest church site in the City. The proposal now meets the minimum buffer observed on other church sites along its northern boundary, but not along the eastern boundary, and is still below the typical buffer widths on other Mounds View church sites. A survey of other suburban communities indicates that requiring buffers of between 20 and 30 feet when parking lots for non-residential uses abut residential uses was typical. The prevailing view on the Planning Commission was that the proposal was too intense f the site, and did not fit into the character of the neighborhood. Approval of this request would be contrary the direction being taken by both the neighborhood and the Planning Commission on the width of buffers desired between parking lots for non-residential uses and residential properties. If the proposal for the New Apostolic Church is approved as is, it would set a new standard as to what is acceptable for development of churches in Mounds View and could be used as a reference point in the evaluation of other proposals. Copies of the minutes from the Planning Commission meetings on August 7, September 4 and September 18 where the New Apostolic Church proposal was discussed are attached. The staff report on this case for the Planning Commission meeting on September 18 is also attached. The order of the attachments is as follows: Resolution 5005 Resolution 5007 colored paper divider Application from Stahl Construction Vicinity Map Wetland Zoning District Map Letter from Curt Lingwall dated 8/28/96 Letter from Bob Long dated 8/30/96 Letter from Rocky Keehn dated 8/23/96 Letter from Mark Bishop, Fire Marshal Letter from New Apostolic Church, Minneapolis Congregation, dated 9/8/96 Picture of New Apostolic Church on Clarence Avenue • Letter from Sweeney, Boer & Ostrow Section 1103.08 from Zoning Code colored paper divider Staff Report to Planning Commission dated 9/18/96 (without attachments) • Mayor and City Council Planning Case No. 452-96: New Apostolic Church (Conditional Use Permit) October 10, 1996 illmPage 9 utes from Planning Commission meeting on August 7, September 4 and September 18 Planning Commission Resolution No. 475-96 recommending denial on conditional use permit Planning Commission Resolution No. 476-96 recommending denial on development review Recommendation Planning Commission: Adopted Resolution No. 475-96 recommending denial of a conditional use permit for the New Apostolic Church to construct a church facility at 3025 County Road H; Planning Case No. 452-96, by a vote of 4 ayes and 3 nays. Staff: Adopt Resolution No. 5005 denying a conditional use permit request for the New Apostolic Church to construct a church facility at 3025 County Road H; Planning Case No. 452-96. (Recommended findings in support of the denial are included in the attached resolution.) If the City Council desires to approve the conditional use permit, Resolution 5007 approving a conditional use permit request for the New Apostolic Church to construct a church facility at 3025 County Road H; Planning Case No. 452-96 has been prepared and is attached. Appropriate findings have been included as well as a list of contingencies recommended by staff. III r ,f,t,}114,7, , . s:\cxvxcx.cciPamela Sheldon, Community Development Director III RESOLUTION NO. 5005 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW • COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA A RESOLUTION DENYING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST FOR THE NEW APOSTOLIC CHURCH TO CONSTRUCT A CHURCH FACILITY AT 3025 COUNTY ROAD If; PLANNING CASE NO. 452-96 WHEREAS, the New Apostolic Church has requested City approval to construct an approximately 4,050 square foot church building and an associated parking lot on property at 3025 County Road H; and, WHEREAS, this property is in the R-1 single family residential district, which requires the approval of a conditional use permit for the development of church facilities; and, WHEREAS, the purpose of the R-1 single family residential district is "to provide for low density single-family detached residential dwelling units and directly related, complementary uses"; and, WHEREAS, the purpose of conditional use permits is "to provide the City with a reasonable degree of discretion in determining the suitability of certain designated uses upon the general welfare, public health and safety"; and, • WHEREAS, Section 1106.04 Subd. 1 of the Mounds View Municipal Code allows churches in the R-1 district provided certain criteria are met; and, WHEREAS, Section 1125.01 Subd. i.e. of the Mounds View Municipal Code requires the Planning Commission to consider certain possible adverse effects of the proposed conditional use. Its judgement shall be based upon (but not limited to) the following factors: (1) Relationship to the 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 character of the surrounding area. (5) The demonstrated need for such use. WHEREAS, Section 1125.01 Subd. 3 of the Mounds View Municipal Code states that the City Council shall consider the advice and recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission and the effect of the proposed use on the Comprehensive Plan and upon the health, safety and general welfare of surrounding lands, and requires that certain findings be made for the approval of a conditional use permit as stated in Section 1125.01 Subd.3.b.(1)-(8); and, 110 • City Council Resolution No. 5005 S October 29, 1996 Page 2 WHEREAS, the City Council has received and had available for review the following documents regarding this conditional use permit request: 1. Application dated 7/15/96 2. Zoning Map 3. Wetland Zone District Map 4. Letter from Curt Lingwall, dated 8/28/96,giving permission from owner for the filing of the conditional use permit application 5. Letter from Bob Long, City Attorney, dated 8/30/96 6. Letter from Rocky Keehn, City Engineer, dated 8/23/96 7. Letter from Mark Bishop, Fire Marshal, dated 10/16/96 8. Letter from New Apostolic Church, Minneapolis Congregation, dated 9/8/96 9. Letter from Sweeney, Borer& Ostrow dated 9/4/96 10. Section 1103.08 from the Mounds View Municipal Code 11. Staff Report to Planning Commission dated 9/18/96 12. Minutes from Planning Commission meeting on 8/7/96 13. Minutes from Planning Commission meeting on 9/4/96 14. Minutes from Planning Commission meeting on 9/18/96 15. Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 475-96 and 476-96 16. Boundary Survey prepared by Pioneer Engineering, printed 10/7/96 • 17. Grading and Erosion Control Plan prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated 9/26/96 18. Landscaping Plan prepared by Rio Architects, dated 9/30/96 19. Floorplans and Elevations prepared by LRK design group, received 10/7/96 WHEREAS, the City Council does hereby make the following findings of fact regarding the requirements set forth in Section 1106.04, Subd. 1 of the Mounds View Zoning Code. The requirements are noted below, and have been grouped to avoid repetitive findings. a. Front yard depths shall be a minimum of thirty five feet(35). b. Side yards shall be no less than thirty feet(30). Complies; Pleasant View Drive is being used as the front of the lot for purposes of setbacks. c. Adequate screening from abutting residential uses and landscaping is provided in compliance with Section 1103.08 of this Title, which are paraphrased below. (1) No fence shall exceed 8 feet. (2) No fences, structures or planting of trees in sight triangle. (3) Fences not to exceed 48"allowed any where on lot;fences not to exceed 96"may be erected behind the front line of the principal building. (4) Fences shall be constructed so surface adjoining adjacent properties and rights-of-way are finished construction. (5) Landscaping required in areas remaining after providing for off street parking, off-street loading, sidewalks and driveways, and building site. City Council Resolution No. 5005 October 29, 1996 • Page 3 (6) Fencing and screening shall consist of either a fence or a green belt planting strip the height of which shall be sufficient to adequately shield the activity from the abutting properties. a. Greenbelt planting strip shall consist of evergreens of sufficient width and density to provide effective screen;planting strip shall contain no structures or other use;planting strips shall be not less than 8 feet in height;earth mounding may be used but limited to no more than 5 feet;planting plan subject to approval of Planning Commission based on recommendation from staff b. Required screening fence shall be masonry, brick, wood or steel not less than 6 feet or more than 8 feet; subject to approval by Planning Commission based on recommendation from staff c. Ground cover shall be established within one yearfollowing issuance of building permit;must control erosion. Complies with 1103.08 Subd. 1-5, except there are five existing trees in the sight triangle at Pleasant View Drive and County Road H. The applicant has shown two of these remaining. All areas of the property other than the parking area, building site and walkways are proposed to be landscaped. No fencing is proposed. With respect to Subd. 6, the applicant is proposing to provide a buffer area along the north property line of 15, 24 and 19 feet in width, and along the east property line of 12 feet. On other church sites in Mounds View, the buffer area between parking lots for • churches and property lines abutting residential properties vary from 14 feet to 63 feet, with 30 feet being typical. The eastern buffer is less than the width suggested by other church sites in Mounds View, and is less than the width suggested by neighboring property owners as adequate (15 feet). The proposed landscaping plan shows six feet for evergreen trees, and three feet for lilacs in the northern and eastern buffer areas, which when planted will be less than the eight feet required by the ordinance. The proposed plan does not meet the requirement for buffering and screening sufficient to adequately screen the church facility and parking lot from abutting properties at the time of development. The City Council finds that requirement c. is not met in its entirety; in particular, the proposal does not meet c.(6). d. Adequate off-street parking and access is provided on the site or on lots directly abutting or directly across a public street to the principal use in compliance with Chapter 1121 of this Title and that such parking is adequately screened and landscaped from surrounding and abutting residential uses in compliance with Section 1103.08 of this Title. e. Adequate of`-street loading and service entrances are provided and regulated where applicable by Chapter 1122 of this Title. There are two driveways serving the site: one from County Road H and one from Pleasant View Drive. The driveway onto County Road H is 21 feet wide and will be used for emergency vehicle access. The one on Pleasant View Drive is twelve feet in • City Council Resolution No. 5005 October 29, 1996 Page 4 width at the property line, which are within the maximum width of 22 feet allowed in the R-1 district. There are 27 parking spaces provided (23 regular spaces, 2 handicapped, and 2 compact) which exceeds Code requirements as long as restrictions are placed on the use of the building so the church auditorium and fellowship hall are not used at the same time, and the capacity of the auditorium is 98 seats. The size of the parking spaces, number of compact spaces, and width of drive aisles meet Code requirements. The Fire Department has stated the 21 foot drive onto County Road H will be sufficient for emergency access, if the building is sprinklered. (Pending receipt of letter from Fire Marshal.) Chapter 1121 includes Subd. 12 which states "Required screening: All open, nonresidential, off-street parking area of five (5) or more spaces shall be screened and landscaped from abutting or surrounding residential districts in compliance with 1103.08(6) of this Title." A fording has been made that the proposed buffer areas and landscaping along the northern and eastern property lines are insufficient to provide adequate screening for the parking lot under item c. above. Off-street loading is not required for this type of use or size of building. The City Council finds that the proposal does not provide sufficient screening and • landscaping to meet the requirements in Chapter 1121 and Section 1103.08(6). Requirement d. is not met. f. The provisions of subdivision 1125.01(1)e of this Title are considered and satisfactorily met. (This section is quoted below.) Adverse Effects: The Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider possible adverse effects of the proposed amendment or conditional use. Its judgment shall be based upon (but not limited to) the following factors: (1) Relationship to the 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 character of the surrounding area. (5) The demonstrated need for the use. The geographical area involved in this application is a residential neighborhood bordered on the south by County Road H which serves as the municipal border. The neighborhood is characterized by deep, oversized lots and mature trees. Because the lots are large, the typical building coverage is low. The applicant's proposal would be a more intensive use of the lot than is typical of the neighborhood. The applicant is proposing to place a 1-1/2 story, 4,050 square foot building (with a 2025 square foot footprint) on a single 22,500 square foot residential lot. Approximately 60% of the site will be in paving and building; 40% of the site will be in landscaping. The amount of paving is far greater than is the case with single family residential • development. This proposal would result in the smallest site developed as a church in • City Council Resolution No. 5005 October 29, 1996 • Page 5 Mounds View (approximately 1/2 acre). The smallest existing site for a church in Mounds View is 1.59 acres (or three times as large) and the average site size is 3.7 acres. The majority of homes in the immediate vicinity are one story, and have been estimated to range from 1,200 to 1,400 square feet in size. They are located on wooded lots. Most of the mature trees in the center of the proposed church site will be removed. The site will look much more barren for a number of years than it does now. The Planning Commission found that the proposal does not fit into the character of the surrounding area based on the intensity of development on this lot, the size of the building and the parking lot. The City Council finds that the proposal will create an adverse impact on the character of the surrounding area, and requirement f. is not met. WHEREAS, the City Council does hereby make the following findings of fact regarding this conditional use permit request with respect to the criteria set forth in Section 1125.01 Subd. 3.b. for the review of conditional use permits. The criteria are noted below, and have been grouped to avoid repetitive findings. (I) The use will not create an excessive burden on existing parks, schools, streets and other public facilities and utilities will serve or are proposed to serve the area. (7) The use will not cause traffic hazards or congestion. 111 (8) Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and necessary facilities have been or will be provided. The New Apostolic Church proposes to hold Sunday School at 8:45-9:30 AM, two Sunday church services at 10:00-11:00 AM and 5:00-6:00 PM, and a Wednesday evening service from 8:00-9:00 PM. The maximum seating in the church is 98 people; the • current congregation is 55 people. Because the use is a church, rather than residential homes, it is not anticipated to create a demand on parks or schools. Both water and sewer service adequate to support this use is available to the site. The site is served by two streets, County Road H and Pleasant View Drive. Given the limited number of services and the size of the congregation, the amount of traffic is anticipated to be low and will occur on weekends or evening rather than during peak commute times. The City Engineer has reviewed the applicant's drainage proposal and indicated that the rate of runoff should not be a problem and the grass treatment areas will provide enough water quality treatment. Drainage will now be directed to County Road H and will flow through grassed areas to allow sediments to percolate before runoff water leaves the site. The Rice Creek Watershed District has stated that a permit from them is not required. The City Council finds that requirements (1), (7) and (8) have been met. (4) The use, in the opinion of the City Council, is reasonably related to the overall needs of the City and to the existing land use. City Council Resolution No. 5005 October 29, 1996 Page 6 (6) The use is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. The Zoning Code envisions the development of churches in residential neighborhoods, and there are five other churches in Mounds View. The applicant has testified that a number of the members of this church are from the Mounds View area, and desire to locate the church closer to their homes. (Comments on the Comprehensive Plan will be provided at the City Council meeting on October 29.) The City Council fords that requirements (4) and (6) have been met (pending the comments on the Comprehensive Plan). (2) The use will be sufficiently compatible or separated by distance or screening from adjacent residentially zoned or used land so that existing homes will not be depredated in value and there will be no deterrence to development of vacant land. (3) The structure and site shall have an appearance that will not have an adverse effect upon adjacent residential properties. (5) The use is consistent with the purposes of the Zoning Code and the purposes of the zoning district in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use. According to the Zoning Code, "the purpose of the R-1, single family district is to provide for low density single-family detached residential dwelling units and directly • related, complementary uses." Churches are allowed in all residential districts in Mounds View. They require, however, approval of a conditional use permit. The conditional use permit process requires a public hearing be held by the City Council before making its decision, and that property owners within 350 feet of the site be notified. Churches, therefore, are regarded as complementary uses which require special, discretionary review. The R-1 district is intended for low density, i.e. low intensity uses. Based on the findings noted earlier under Section 1106.04, Subd. 1.c. and f. adequate screening and buffering have not been provided between the church facility and its parking lot and adjacent residential uses. The Planning Commission found that the proposal does not fit into the character of the surrounding area based on the intensity of development on this lot, the size of the building and the parking lot. The proposal would establish a new benchmark as to the site size and buffer widths which are acceptable to the community, below current conditions on church sites in Mounds View. City Council finds that requirements (2), (3) and (5) are not met. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Mounds has recommended in Resolution No. 475-96 that the conditional use permit request from the New Apostolic Church for development of church facility at 3025 County Road H be denied; and, City Council Resolution No. 5005 October 29, 1996 Page 7 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Mounds View does hereby find that the conditional use permit request as proposed by the New Apostolic Church for 3025 County Road H does not meet the criteria and requirements set forth in Section 1106.04 Subd. 1 nor Section 1125.01 Subd. 3.b. in their entirety. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council does hereby deny the conditional use permit for development of a church facility at 3025 County Road H as presented by the New Apostolic Church in its plans dated September 26 and 30, 1996 and October 7, 1996. Adopted this 29th day of October, 1996 Jerome Linke, Mayor ATTEST: Charles Whiting, City Clerk-Administrator (SEAL) B:ICUPRESO.DEN RESOLUTION NO. 5007 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST FOR THE NEW APOSTOLIC CHURCH TO CONSTRUCT A CHURCH FACILITY AT 3025 COUNTY ROAD H; PLANNING CASE NO. 452-96 WHEREAS, the New Apostolic Church has requested City approval to construct an approximately 4,050 square foot church building and an associated parking lot on property at 3025 County Road H and described as: KNOLLWOOD PARK WEST 225 FEET OF LOT 75 WHEREAS, this property is in the R-1 single family residential district, which requires the approval of a conditional use permit for the development of church facilities; and, WHEREAS, the purpose of the R-1 single family residential district is "to provide for low density single-family detached residential dwelling units and directly related, complementary uses"; and, 11111 WHEREAS, the purpose of conditional use permits is "to provide the City with a reasonable degree of discretion in determining the suitability of certain designated uses upon the general welfare, public health and safety"; and, WHEREAS, Section 1106.04 Subd. 1 of the Mounds View Municipal Code allows churches in the R-1 district provided certain criteria are met; and, WHEREAS, Section 1125.01 Subd. i.e. of the Mounds View Municipal Code requires the Planning Commission to consider certain possible adverse effects of the proposed conditional use. Its judgement shall be based upon (but not limited to) the following factors: (1) Relationship to the 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 character of the surrounding area. (5) The demonstrated need for such use. WHEREAS, Section 1125.01 Subd. 3 of the Mounds View Municipal Code states that the City Council shall consider the advice and recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission and the effect of the proposed use on the Comprehensive Plan and upon the health, 11111 City Council Resolution No. 5007 October 29, 1996 11111 Page 2 safety and general welfare of surrounding lands, and requires that certain findings be made for the approval of a conditional use permit as stated in Section 1125.01 Subd.3.b.(1)-(8); and, WHEREAS, the City Council has received and had available for review the following documents regarding this conditional use permit request: 1. Application dated 7/15/96 2. Zoning Map 3. Wetland Zone District Map 4. Letter from Curt Lingwall, dated 8/28/96,giving permission from owner for the filing of the conditional use permit application 5. Letter from Bob Long, City Attorney, dated 8/30/96 6. Letter from Rocky Keehn, City Engineer, dated 8/23/96 7. Letter from Mark Bishop, Fire Marshal, dated 10/16/96 8. Letter from New Apostolic Church, Minneapolis Congregation, dated 9/8/96 9. Letter from Sweeney, Borer&Ostrow dated 9/4/96 10. Section 1103.08 from the Mounds View Municipal Code 11. Staff Report to Planning Commission dated 9/18/96 12. Minutes from Planning Commission meeting on 8/7/96 13. Minutes from Planning Commission meeting on 9/4/96 14. Minutes from Planning Commission meeting on 9/18/96 11/ 15. Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 475-96 and 476-96 16. Boundary Survey prepared by Pioneer Engineering, printed 10/7/96 17. Grading and Erosion Control Plan prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated 9/26/96 18. Landscaping Plan prepared by Rio Architects, dated 9/30/96 19. Floorplans and Elevations prepared by LRK design group, received 10/7/96 WHEREAS, the City Council does hereby make the following findings of fact regarding the requirements set forth in Section 1106.04, Subd. 1 of the Mounds View Zoning Code. The requirements are noted below, and have been grouped to avoid repetitive findings. a. Front yard depths shall be a minimum of thirty five feet(35'). b. Side yards shall be no less than thirty feet(30'). Complies; Pleasant View Drive is being used as the front of the lot for purposes of setbacks. c. Adequate screening from abutting residential uses and landscaping is provided in compliance with Section 1103.08 of this Title, which are paraphrased below. (1) No fence shall exceed 8 feet. (2) No fences,structures or planting of trees in sight triangle. (3) Fences not to exceed 48"allowed any where on lot;fences not to exceed 96"may be erected behind the front line of the principal building. (4) Fences shall be constructed so surface adjoining adjacent properties and rights-of-way are finished construction. City Council Resolution No. 5007 October 29, 1996 Page 3 (5) Landscaping required in areas remaining after providing for off street parking, off-street loading, sidewalks and driveways, and building site. (6) Fencing and screening shall consist of either a fence or a green belt planting strip the height of which shall be sufficient to adequately shield the activity from the abutting properties. a. Greenbelt planting strip shall consist of evergreens of sufficient width and density to provide effective screen;planting strip shall contain no structures or other use;planting strips shall be not less than 8 feet in height; earth mounding may be used but limited to no more than 5 feet;planting plan subject to approval of Planning Commission based on recommendation from staff: b. Required screening fence shall be masonry, brick, wood or steel not less than 6 feet or more than 8 feet;subject to approval by Planning Commission based on recommendation from staff: c. Ground cover shall be established within one year following issuance of building permit;must control erosion. The applicant has provided adequate screening from abutting residential uses by including landscaped buffer areas along the north and east property lines. The buffer along the north property line measures 15, 24 and 19 feet, going west to east, and meets or exceeds the width of 15 feet requested by the property owner to the north. The wider sections of the buffer are located in the area most critical to this property owner: the side and rear yard of his property. The buffer along the east side is 12 feet, and has been increased from the original proposal of 10 feet. The house belonging to the property owner on the east side is 60 feet from the common property line, and there is an existing wooded area on the neighbor's property abutting this line. The applicant is proposing to plant a double row of evergreen trees along the northern boundary, further bolstered by a lilac hedge and existing mature deciduous trees. A row of evergreens is also proposed along the eastern boundary. The height of the evergreens at planting will be six feet, and are expected to grow to the required eight feet within 2®3 years. The City Council finds that the requirement for landscaping and screening in c. is met d. Adequate off-street parking and access is provided on the site or on lots directly abutting or directly across a public street to the principal use in compliance with Chapter 1121 of this Title and that such parking is adequately screened and landscaped from surrounding and abutting residential uses in compliance with Section 1103.08 of this Title. e. Adequate off-street loading and service entrances are provided and regulated where applicable by Chapter 1122 of this Title. There are two driveways serving the site: one from County Road H and one from Pleasant View Drive. The driveway onto County Road H is 21 feet wide,and the one on Pleasant View Drive is 12 feet wide, at the property line. These widths are within the maximum of 22 feet allowed in the R-1 district. The driveway onto County Road City Council Resolution No. 5007 October 29, 1996 Page 4 H will be used for emergency vehicle access. There are 27 parking spaces provided (23 regular spaces, 2 handicapped, and 2 compact) which exceeds Code requirements as long with restrictions that the church auditorium and fellowship hall will not used at the same time, and the capacity of the auditorium is 98 seats. The size of the parking spaces, number of compact spaces, and width of drive aisles meet Code requirements. The Fire Department has stated the 21 foot drive onto County Road H will be sufficient for emergency access, if the building is sprinklered. (Pending receipt of letter from Fire Marshal.) Chapter 1121 includes Subd. 12 which states "Required screening: All open, nonresidential, off-street parking area of five (5) or more spaces shall be screened and landscaped from abutting or surrounding residential districts in compliance with 1103.08(6) of this Title." A fording has been made that the proposed buffer areas and landscaping along the northern and eastern property lines is sufficient to provide adequate screening for the parking lot under item c. above. Off-street loading is not required for this type of use or size of building. The City Council finds that requirements d. and e. are met. f. The provisions of subdivision 1125.01(1)e of this Title are considered and satisfactorily met. (This section is • quoted below.) Adverse Effects: The Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider possible adverse effects of the proposed amendment or conditional use. Its judgment shall be based upon (but not limited to) the following factors: (1) Relationship to the Municipal Comprehensive Plan (2) The geographical area involved. (3) Whether such use will tend to or actually depredate the area in which it is proposed. (4) The character of the surrounding area. (5) The demonstrated need for the use. The geographical area involved in this application is a residential neighborhood bordered on the south by County Road H which serves as the municipal border. The neighborhood is characterized by deep, oversized lots and mature trees. The applicant has preserved 21 existing mature trees on the site, added 25 evergreen trees and 2 deciduous trees, and proposes to plant a lilac hedge and numerous shrubs. These trees when mature will create a wooded effect on the lot which is in keeping with the rest of the neighborhood. The building will be residential in scale. The building footprint of 2,025 square feet, and height of 1-1/2 stories is within the realm of sizes for single family homes in this area. The City Council fords that criteria f. is met. • City Council Resolution No. 5007 4110 October 29, 1996 Page 5 WHEREAS, the City Council does hereby make the following findings of fact regarding this conditional use permit request with respect to the criteria set forth in Section 1125.01 Subd. 3.b. for the review of conditional use permits. The criteria are noted below, and have been grouped to avoid repetitive findings. (1) The use will not create an excessive burden on existing parks, schools, streets and other public facilities and utilities will serve or are proposed to serve the area. (7) The use will not cause traffic hazards or congestion. (8) Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and necessary facilities have been or will be provided. The New Apostolic Church proposes to hold Sunday School at 8:45-9:30 AM, two Sunday church services at 10:00-11:00 AM and 5:00-6:00 PM, and a Wednesday evening service from 8:00-9:00 PM. The maximum seating in the church is 98 people; the current congregation is 55 people. Because the use is a church, rather than residential homes, it is not anticipated to create a demand on parks or schools. Both water and sewer service adequate to support this use is available to the site. The site is served by two streets, County Road H and Pleasant View Drive. Given the limited number of services and the size of the congregation, the amount of traffic is anticipated to be low and will occur on weekends or evening rather than during peak commute times. S The City Engineer has reviewed the applicant's drainage proposal and indicated that the rate of runoff should not be a problem and the grass treatment areas will provide enough water quality treatment. Drainage will now be directed to County Road H and will flow through grassed areas to allow sediments to percolate before runoff water leaves the site. The Rice Creek Watershed District has stated that a permit from them is not required. The City Council finds that criteria (1), (7) and (8) have been met. (4) The use, in the opinion of the City Council, is reasonably related to the overall needs of the City and to the existing land use. (6) The use is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. The Zoning Code envisions the development of churches in residential neighborhoods, and there are five other churches in Mounds View. The applicant has testified that a number of the members of this church are from the Mounds View area, and desire to locate the church closer to their homes. (Comments on the Comprehensive Plan will be provided at the City Council meeting on October 29.) The City Council finds that criteria (4) and (6) have been met (pending the comments on the Comprehensive Plan). • City Council Resolution No. 5007 October 29, 1996 Page 6 (2) The use will be sufficiently compatible or separated by distance or screening from adjacent residentially zoned or used land so that existing homes will not be depredated in value and there will be no deterrence to development of vacant land. (3) The structure and site shall have an appearance that will not have an adverse effect upon adjacent residential properties. (5) The use is consistent with the purposes of the Zoning Code and the purposes of the zoning district in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use. . The Mounds View Zoning Code allows for churches as complementary uses in all residential districts including the R-1 district. The proposed church will have a building footprint of 2,025 square feet and will be 1-1/2 stories. This size is within the range of a single family house, and will be compatible with the character of the surrounding neighborhood, which includes one and two story homes of varying sizes. The plans provide adequate screening and buffering to adjacent residential properties as noted in c. and f. above. The City Council finds that criteria (2), (3) and (5) are met. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Mounds has recommended in Resolution No. 475-96 that the conditional use permit request from the New Apostolic Church for development of church facility at 3025 County Road H be denied; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Mounds View has considered the recommendation of the Planning Commission, and does hereby find that the conditional use permit request as proposed by the New Apostolic Church for 3025 County Road H meets the criteria and requirements set forth in Section 1106.04 Subd. 1 nor Section 1125.01 Subd. 3.b. in their entirety. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council does hereby approved the conditional use permit for development of a church facility at 3025 County Road H as presented by the New Apostolic Church in the grading and erosion control plans (9/26/96), landscaping plans (9/30/96), and the floorplans and elevations (received 10/7/96), subject to the following contingencies: 1. The granting of this conditional use permit is contingent upon the granting of a wetland alteration permit, and shall be null and void if this approval is not received within 120 days of the date on which City Council acts to grant this conditional use permit. In no event shall any building permits be issued until such time as the wetland alteration permit has been granted. • City Council Resolution No. 5007 111 October 29, 1996 Page 7 2. Prior to issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall: a. Revise the landscaping plan to substitute White pine for Austrian pine in the northwest corner of the site and along the eastern site boundary. The spacing of the pine and spruce shall be adjusted to assure that sufficient room is available for the different branching structures of these two types of evergreens. b. Revise the landscaping plan to show the height specified for the evergreen trees shall be 6-7 feet. The applicant shall endeavor to obtain seven foot evergreen trees for planting on the site. c. Revise the landscaping plan to add a note which states: "The property owner shall be responsible for the replacement of any landscape materials which die during the lifetime of this project, including the existing mature trees on the site shown as being retained on this landscape plan. The size and species of landscape materials used for replacement shall be approved by the Community Development Director, after consultation with the City Forester." • d. Add a detail sheet to the plan package which shows the temporary construction signage for the church, the permanent ground mounted sign announcing the denomination of the church and times of its services, and the directional signage at driveway onto Pleasant View Drive which states "Exit Only; Do Not Enter". The size of the temporary construction signage shall be no more than 2 feet 6 inches x 8 feet, and shall be ground-mounted on posts with an overall height of no more than five feet. The sign shall not be placed in the sight triangle at the intersection of County Road H and Pleasant View Drive. The sign shall face County Road H and shall not be illuminated. The size of the sign announcing services shall be no more than 4 feet x 10 feet and shall be ground- mounted on posts, with the overall height of the sign no more than 4.5 feet from the ground. This sign may have external, ground-mounted illumination, which may be turned on during evening and nighttime hours. The directional sign at Pleasant View Drive shall be no more than 1-1/2 foot x 3 feet and shall be ground-mounted on posts, with the overall height of the `sign no more than three feet from the ground. Notes stating these requirements shall be included on the detail sheet. e. The elevations shall be modified to remove the name of the church from the walls, and shall reduce the size of the cross on the east side to 21 • square feet, and the cross on the west side to 39 sq.ft. A note shall be City Council Resolution No. 5007 October 29, 1996 Page 8 added to the elevations which states: "Signs shall be allowed at the size and location as shown on this plan, and as shown on the detail sheet included in this plan package. Signs shall comply with the design and construction standards contained in Chapter 1008 of the Mounds View Municipal Code. Signs require approval of a separate permit prior to installation. The total signage on the east end of the building shall be 21 square feet and shall consist of a cross only, and on the west end of the building shall be 39 square feet and shall consist of a cross only. No sign announcing the name of the church shall be wall-mounted. The cross on the east end of the building shall not be illuminated. The cross on the west of the building may be illuminated, but only between the hours 5:00 PM and 9:00 PM each evening. The level of illumination shall be approved by the Director of Community Development, and shall be subdued so as to prevent glare onto properties either abutting or across abutting streets." f. The elevations shall be revised to show the steeple at nine feet above the ridgeline of the roof. g. Provide five (5) copies of the complete plan package including the revised • landscaping plan and the new detail sheet to the Director of Community Development. 3. Use of the church building shall be arranged and scheduled so there is no overlapping use of the auditorium and the fellowship hall. Parking requirements have been calculated and approved based on this arrangement. Church services shall be scheduled so there is at least three hours between each service (with allowance for Sunday School preceding each service.) 4. The auditorium contains bench-style pews. The seating capacity in the church auditorium shall be calculated based on 22" of bench space for each seat. The seating capacity shall be limited to 98 seats. Any increase in seating capacity shall require the approval of an amended conditional use permit by the City of Mounds View. 5. Prior to issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall obtain approval from the Community Development Director for a lighting plan showing any exterior lighting to be installed on the site. Parking lot lighting shall be mounted on poles on poles and not on the building. Poles shall not exceed 18 feet in height. The luminaires shall be limited to 250 watts, have sharp cutoffs and downcast fixtures to direct light onto the parking lot and not onto adjacent properties. The number of pole mounted lights shall be determined by the Community Development City Council Resolution No. 5007 41111 October 29, 1996 Page 9 Director as part of the approval of the lighting plan. Soffit-style lighting above building entrances and under the eaves along the north and south side of the building shall be permitted. Parking lot lighting and soffit-style building lighting may be turned on from one hour before to one hour after evening services, but shall be turned off no event later than 9:00 PM and shall not be used on evenings when no services are held. Walkway lighting using bollards, not to exceed four feet in height, may be used in the vicinity of the main entrance on the south side of the building and may be illuminated during all hours of darkness. 6. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permit, the applicant shall obtain approval for construction drawings and shall comply with all requirements of Title 1000: Building and Development Regulations. The construction drawings shall show no more than a 98-seat capacity in the church. 7. Approval of this site layout is dependent on sprinklering of the building, because the access drive along the north side of the building is insufficient for emergency access purposes. The applicant shall obtain approval for a plan for sprinklering the building from the Fire Department prior to the issuance of any grading or building permit. Sprinklers shall be installed and pass inspection by the Fire Department prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the building. 8. The height of the steeple shall be limited to nine feet above the ridgeline of the roof. 9. Prior to any grading or demolition work on the site, the applicant shall install construction fencing at or beyond the dripline of any existing trees to be preserved according to the landscaping plans approved with this conditional use permit. Adjustment of fencing locations may be approved by the Director of Community Development, after consultation with the City Forester, based on practical necessity. No construction equipment or activity shall be permitted within these fenced areas. The applicant shall act upon the advice of the City Forester and shall exercise diligence during the construction process to prevent disturbance of root systems and changes in ground elevations which would cause these existing trees to die. 10. Prior to any grading or demolition work on the site, silt fencing shall be put in place as shown on the grading and erosion control plan and shall be maintained throughout construction. 11. Prior to issuance of any occupancy permit, the applicant shall trim the existing trees proposed to remain in the sight triangle at the intersection of Pleasant View Drive and County Road H, if needed, to assure no sight distance problem is caused. • City Council Resolution No. 5007 October 29, 1996 110 Page 10 12. Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits, the property owner shall enter into a development contract as required by Chapter 1006 of the Mounds View Municipal Code. 13. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits, the applicant shall record this conditional use permit with Ramsey County and shall provide evidence of recordation to the Mounds View Community Development Director. 14. Approval of this conditional use permit shall include the following: • Boundary Survey prepared by Pioneer Engineering, printed 10/7/96 • Grading and Erosion Control Plan prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated 9/26/96 • Landscaping Plan prepared by Rio Architects, dated 9/30/96 and revised in accordance with #2.a. and #2.b. above • Floorplans and Elevations prepared by LRK design group, received 10/7/96, and revised in accordance with #2.d. and #2.e. above. • Detail Sheet to be prepared in accordance with #2.c. above. Adopted this 29th day of October, 1996 • Jerome Linke, Mayor ATTEST: Charles Whiting, City Clerk-Administrator (SEAL) B:\CUPRESO.APP CI 96 16:06 FA. 612 T84 3462 _ _ __ cm. OF MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING APPLICATION APPLICANT: Stahl Construction Company Phone 931-9300 110 ADDRESS: 5900 Rowland Road, Minnetonka, Minnesota 55343 Street Address, City, Stats, and ?ip Code Interest in Property (check appropriate boot): Q Owner of Property Q Contract for Deed Owner ❑ Lassos, Operator, Manager C Agreement to Purchase • Q Outer (=plain) Contractor Oocsanentery evidence of appKeenre interest in the property may be required boa.find Cty action at Vie request PRCPETY INVOLVED: . Address/General Location 3025 County Road H, Mounds View Legal Description or Property fdentiftcation Number Lot 75. Knoll wood Park. Ramsey County, Minnesota Legal Owner. Name/Address W 255'' $ 4a5' Of A ! 7.5" _ 0'7731 73—x6 —0031 Present Use (chock appropriata box): j o o X. a as C UndevelopedNarant a 9, 5 0 O 5-15;al Single Family Dwelling , III Q Duplex/Two Forney Dwelling $"/ 7 a G,^-� Q Mull-Perna,/ (Na. at Units ) Q 8usiness/Ccmmerca! Establishment ❑ Industrial Establishment O Other (explain) Property C Q Abstract Q Torrens ', IIE UEST: Conditional Use Permit cL ;O ‘A.4_4,0-7, yv .���IVP Lt.) -1-7) i'.�cY,y\%,_, c r (' %1 a L c -t. IA 7 2C c L. AF 4I , i 474---17 ---464''1--- �1 Q i r . • ____ 1 ( L iA, &rc is i�(Y CtA---5L6`r\(\k (.4 Q w_ a - 1 ;5�1^J Com" 'Please nota Applicant may be responsible far additional fees assaciazed with . _-i j of . -- est I HEREBY DECLARE THAT THE AEOVE STATEMENT AAE TRU . ...►.4 �% 10 ii_ _, .. illiam A. Diem -i S200Jacsa. ' • 5200.maximum SIX= Pant PaidDedieetian Feee qa est - art_4411 ammo=0 Dem.Paid U..Parma Fl-1 to F61• - - aelers__ _ Redapt Number C are apJSite PlanR.viasS�.st� Odfa�s+ca�minimum 100.maxima 5500 Tori Peas Paid c.5 0• :}O n �ivreion 3150 Use Paid '-/G - !(p Mea r Subdivision 5250 Ow 5230 deposit Pleatim NumberS� Corny. Plan Msandm.m =0 Wetland Alteration Pent* 350 picas deposit darrmin.d by Steri Additionei Fee Paid / 5-0' r>O Wederd Salter Permit S!0 Oaa.Paid 7-/G,- P./6- 0 , tying SSC Pam*Numb.r 5-Q 1 U 0 PUO x.350 PUO Atevendrnard Si5C Dae of rind action ,wpqavED C oa,+i© C T a Das 7- S l _ _Pa . ti . _ " �: 7 N N N • 7338 /,1"P' 30 N N 33 n n n a o 730 N 7310 A')�' la M O N rn o M N a, rn H2 O O O O S M N N N N N R, R-2 ��Omi MMM♦ M yo 7295 nti ®� 1517 NNNNc m N MRO ng ®�O a, � iifiii3�� 1�J — — Npmm ao :: 8 � 5vI < v M M NI .IIIi N N � ME N 1 NL 'A.S I 4 52600 Qa .LOU'SA mM n -�� ®E O N N N N N N N 7234 Mia �� ®�lli N M M N > �O m (D fa t0 fp tp N N N N NI 7226 �� ��- CLE 1:::•1111 7200 M 719• PIM v i:5411%. N P o f.' 7188 R'"4 �� 23d N �n N 1 Ili O' V' M 716•: . . ..� �� N N N_ N,N ill N� 7150 t7M � ®� 521 III_II m m (gME, ®EM ® i IiiII5Iau ! 11fl N N W ZEE • ® !0t:i 5 �• • � `;• - 51 5149 Op 709 N roil:Ea:az®• O • • • 5140 5141 5140 5141 0 709 -dligli 7090 3i ' 5132 513 ® 2 707 •.• f filt ®® ems • 7082 O 7095 7074 O 5124 5125 �� _,• . Z 7063 n a, f A �®AIM N�® 5116. 512 7054 7069 co ell N 6 CREST ' ®z®� 5105 7054 7057AIM ��7044 OR W PARK 5108 5109.. .: •' 5108 ,�i '�^ Woo0CREST >. N 7034 _ 704 . `7028 o N N; N � •• 5101 •• 5101 51005101. 7026 „Am-tr. N N PF N calm Al •;CREST 7 "� IENES . • 5092�' 5C92t 509' • S 5092 509 Q 5092 Narcs • 5086 5085 7006 •ra" maw �� 2940 50861�50�8 •c• •-- 5080 5079 Z 5080 507E 6986E on iiinvnmor 6960 � 5080E1'l� •'• EMovz• 5072 5071 2 5072 507 8970 Q 11� ti�pilli3/4**111111 1 s�La 1212113111 152. 5071 • ��,•t o • 6951 3 � cm; • �1 50645 06E 695 ;•`4''�a� n °N'I 940 506. 506 w�• 505 ® _ � 5060 505• •••'505 5060 5059 m •.• 505E _ izi 0__��� I ® • •.Z • 505- 505415053 505: ®, em,... 505 5053 ;. *Erle!! 50.461. 504E i N n o INNI N')M N MEM 04:5045 •— OE= = O m m ` �� N of N N . . �• — �� al6900 — • GEND ZONING DISTRICTS s R-1 SINGLE—FAMILY RESIDENTIAL B-2 L R-2 SINGLE & TWO FAMILY RESIDENTIAL 8-3 I- R-3 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 8-4 F R-4 HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL I-1 1 4105 MOBILE HOME PF P R-0 RESIDENTIAL/OFFICE PUD F 8-1 NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS CRP C •••-,iE. : 27 ... 1 I INIIIMIM I ..-...-1 Li . ... .1 > 1 ..---..--- I - 4 to•e..•I. I : II, 2,; . 25 o :: . ----- -- i I . • Alt_______ Ni I I , , ,. • i.."I -s• 2 3 111..1! 2 4 1 Cr .. .. }-- I : . ' ••• ' 1 I Z ..- f . .....• i 4 o a.... 4 1 1 44 1 43 42 : 41 g 2 4..4. 48 7 46 45 I o r 4 .7 2 .81 1 i I . 22 < * *I i i ! r - --1 • I..... t[•'1 i jjaa___ 1 .. • • • ,. ,„... ,,,o., -Iallirt":7 •• ' 41T.. 100 r „, , rcs,---- „..„ 0 po-r— • . 0 .., __ . -,.,.... ,04.3, 4„„.,z, _ '10901 o Woodale Drive it. .1 .9 . I . •i12117',--4-* ...! ....___:_l____L______I ; , •*:.%•44i) 1 0• • ,21 14 i ,..• . 4, 4 • . . ..,. iz 4 4 a , ( Z -1 63Atiiiiniiaal.A.'T.- , 1-i 6• --- -- _______ i (E3 9 a • • • c-.6&7 1 --.1' 9 __ .. -1q._ _t..E- -.1 -1 .::::::K:i:K::::::•,:::Aiiiii;:i:i:KOK: ie...Protto104......40 ,. I 2 *2 : i 1 •:::::::::::::::::::::,::::•+:.:.;::::::::::::::::::::5 4.0.0.-Atst•-..0.. •.. 50 ' LU i.• it-al „............ . ,-.2-l-,,,*:::K*.40::::.:.i::*,:f::::::;::;::::::::.;.::K:i:::•::::::::--:::::::y::.....1,4„....t..z.,..,„,,........ • CO... a .. >; 7° it; .1:2E:;:iiiMin .- .:ii......... 886.......verr.„.888 v _ mm if::::x: zils::•:.vie ..0.0 ,4,,, '' SI , CC g :i*i:i*i:1:i*ii::i:::::::::::::.:i*:*i::::.:K:K::„. :::A:lo . . ott• ••••••:. 8 5 0./c:::::::-:•:•:•:•:,:.4.......•• : • ,. ,..,....,.. .„, „,,., 0'- •:::;N:K:::::::::::::::::::::::::::n*i:i::.ig::.ii?::?•1::::?:::::.j.c.: lertStreeier"teo.'; 2° 1 02 _.______________, - _ —__ •••:::•:•:-...,:•:•:,,..:•::::::::::::::::::::::::i:::::•::::::::::xsOc:*0::,::: ."!:.*:.••••-•:AS•SoroSe.: 1 . •••:::::•:•:.••••:•:•:•:::•:•:-::.:.:•:.:•:•:.:•:•...•••'I•::::.:::::::::::::::•:Km:: ,••••••••••tiV.-ii,:otis, 52 A::::,:i:::.i:i*:•:.:•:I.:Kii:IiiK:::::i:if::.::if::':'. :.:.:•:::.::.::::•K:i:: :*;:i: to•ettttittti•Vii0 - ; z eliiiiiii:K:§K:i*iiiiiiiiiiiii§ilii:::?......:§iiiiIK:iiiiiigil:g,,:..Atite.g...to;...1!t.:,..”. ,... '-----------------1 t--- •Oaiiiii:ii:.:::iigi:i:::i:i:i:i:::i:iii:::.;,:iii:ii:1::.i:iiii:.::::1:::Viiiiiiii::::::ii:.::;:;,01•0•1410:00.1005Wr A i :* . . . . :: : : ::::.::::.??,:MAjr....:0S.A...? Woocicrest Dr 53 :I !•_. 1•::: ::.,:.: :::•:".8 ife.:1:::::::::::::1:::•:' ::•:•::::::::::::0:...4.K::::z ::::::::::::::::::::•...4.,.:.:::::::::. ...:.:....:•:.•• ••••••0.0:Auto ••::::::::;::::::::::M .:::::: .-:•.:•:.::::.K:Mip::::::::::::: ::::::.::.:,.:, ttttttttttt *.i! ,...._:':':':*:*:**/ 4::::::::•::.iftM::*:::*i:i:i::.iiii iii.44iii:.,ottr:‘,..i!sit,‘ 1 ..1 :::iff:::iffiiiii:iii:':.;:ai:KiiiglItlre5!K:W.ti:.::. iiiit:i*.i:iii:k ICAloolig:. • ',..,.....;r:',...z.-..-,-z,-_,-„Y•:,•;:' *-7. .A.•:/,',1,-...1,10.0.9.:... 1 . :::•:•:.:4-:•::::,:,::::::::::::::•:.>:•:...:•:•):•:::•:..c.:•,E :Atil::,, lootp..1._,,two?, s ':••,,,,_.-_,..._.,':*:'::::::::•:•:::::::•:::::::::::::::::::;:::::::::::•:::*:::•:,:•:•:•::::::::::::::::::::::::,, .... I o4 i'llAIi."0",...1 I I..., 55 :,:.:.::.:::::::::::: :::KiKi::::;:.::•**.s?.::iii:::::::;:it•!::::.:igiti::.....:•::'" Spring View - --------i't :: 56 :i ..... PO- Wiiiiii:. : Nti PI .:g;.::•:•::iniii.ii.::...Mil::i;iiiiiiiiiii'./ .........„....,....t. 11::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::x•:•:•:•:•:•:::•:-:•:•:•:•.-. ..I.v. ,:•:•:<•:::::::::::::•:•:•::::::::::•:•:•:•:•:-:•:::::::::::::::::::::::::ill , 41111, _ i--- 5 7 :f L _. '':,14.. .i ., ,-.0.-. ,It-st:t.:i„..........H....At.#1.. ;-.1r..;.t.4,..." . • : -41, ••.•••••,,,,..„•:::,-•,., V' , •... > : : :.iiii:•:: : : :. .. i:t . i: r 31 ........................ 0 :. T ',....:. ...,.:10 • 3 1 Lane a- 1-------* - - '':iiiii:i:if::i:i:i:i:iiii:i:i:i::.*-::iiiiiii.::.::::iiii:::::.:--- • 5.a.,...- SPRIN ;;EN. •_,>/..,_ ' •••.,:•:•:::::•:•:•:•:•:•:•:7:: :::.:....x.:.:,,,,,........,....„,:...„ WI, ir a 1 •0 0 : i c 0 j ...4 58 1.-:: •••••••• • ••••••••••••-• ..... ..... •••••••••••••••• ••••••••••.....,............... , ! ,tiss7s, Z '',::::*i:i.:giiiii:i::*i:K:.:::*:*i::::::::::KfA:M:i:::::-... ':•::iii:iK:::::.::.:i:K:iki:K:KM:.:ii:::i::.::•::::_:K:i:i:::i:K:>. 1 i I i,.„.....",,eliWi .___ ;*:.::-P.J.::::.::•-•:.•.:ti.:::...:iii:;: :=1:i:i:if:Mi:iiii:-. 1 C.4,00411 s-'..t.'.... fr4 , ,2 2 i _ < 1 ' ::.:::i::iiia.::iiiii::...:iiiini:ii::iiii:iiii.:i:iiiiiiKig...i:iii:.. 1 . ' , . -___ I 7 (-0., ^ c151 0 i; - --4-.'::::::::::KM:i:M.•::::::::::::::i:K:?4,::i:Ki:x.:***::•:1::•:•:*:,. , 1 ..,.•/ 00 .^ .1:.:;::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::,:::*<•:•:•:•:-:::*::::,,IF::::!!1:::::g1::"....:., 8 7,,, 1 ,,.,, _ _1 4 ,Li ),..,..:-----------t------I < - ......„...........„::::::::• .....:•:„.................t.,::::::::::::: :0 6 1 il.1 ., 4E::iiiniMi:•••:::-ML4.:MinMile. . I" 4- 1.11:1_a_ i- -,ii:.,::4::.**::::;2i::::.:i*::igi::.•::1:::...,,•: :::::::;K:i:i::::::::iiif:::::imi i,...-- ariZ. ; 1.4. I+i I,. • . 1! a. -- *--77-m:;:;:;:;:i:;:;:;:::::;::.:.:-:;iiAi.:ifsi*;w.i::.:::.: i•i::::.: , ! `••La) 2 ' !r I I •- ,... : MI igii::illiii:.: 1 1 h '52,74 li •44 ,..- . : . X:i*.:::.::.:K:i*i.•:;i:K::::::-;K::.iiiii:i::.*:.::KW:::::::::,. 1 •(ET) .1 -1.0_,0/ ol 1'-• 7.2.5 ..?:.:.K:K:i::::-Ii:ifaii:•..i...: .:::..i.•:*if i op 1 1 -1,4 r County Rd. H s'" •• , 100 I oo ,ow. 1 100.17 I I, - -COUNTY --- -/---------IROAD ' 27.70 45 / II/ ' . . . - -. - ., .. • .___ -,-,_...._-----. . . -, --• 09/03/96 11:02 STAHL CONSTRUCTION + 612 784 3462 NO.154 P001/001 • .AIG-28-19% 15:51 COUNSELOR REALTY - SUP 612 786 4312 P.02 nun+ ii' J.aJIJ iJ• Y♦ I+NN11U ..1 I •�� •�• --- •. .w • August 28,1996 To whom it may concern. I authorize the new purchasers NATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF THE NEW APOSTOLIC CHURCH and STAHL CONSTRUCTION far the property at 3025 County Road H to apply for a variance and/or conditional use permit with the city of Mounds View. • • Curtis I Lingwall Contract Holder • S TOTAL P.03 1 • • KENNEDY & GRAVEN CaARTERED AetormYs at LawDaus J.TRohnox 470 Pffl bar?Gamer,MianapoTis,Minnesota 5540'2 Iran M.W XIDEI s Ronal-A.ALsor (61Z)337-9300 Box=L.WsLY.A18 Mums M BATI]Sllrsox JOE Y.YANG • RONALD H.BAm Facsimile(632)337-9310 SrmsENLBunn JORN B.DEAN DAM L.GR.& (1n-$9) Damn J.GREENswnc '— DAM1AD J-KENNEDY or COVIfSCL CDARiis L.LEF t Aoaor o GaeL9ox JOHN M.I EFEVR&JR. WRITER'S DIJ�tEGT DIAL Rom=L.DAWI.SON Ron=3 UNDALL 337-9202 WELIJdtG7ON a.IAvv Rosen C.LoNCr FLOYD B.WON JAmis M.Motto= awls A.ITAMON Comma H.Immo?' T_JAY SALIax August 30, 1996 Pam Sheldon Community Development Director City of Mounds View 2401 Highway 10 Mounds View, MN 55112 RE: Legal Opinion on Plsning Commission and City Council Discretion and Procedures in Considering Conditional Use Permits and Variances Our File No. MU125-47 Dear Pam: Issues: You have asked for a legal opinion on the following three issues: 4110 1. What procedures should the Planning Commission follow, and what is the role of the City Council, in the issuance of a conditional use permit? 2. What procedures should the Pln i nit g Commission follow, and what is the role of the City Council, in the granting of a variance to the zoning code? 3. Does the Planning Commission and the City Council retain their discretion to grant or deny conditional use permits and variances regardless of the actions undertaken by the applicant prior to a public hearing and decision of either the Planning Commission or the City Council? Answers: Issue No. 1: Pursuant to section 1125.01 of the Mounds View Municipal Code (the "Code'!), an application for a conditional use permit is referred to the City staff for a report and recommendations to be presented to the PlRT1 r1i ig and Zoning Commission (the "Planning Commission") and the staff reports and recommendations are to be made part of the permanent written record of the Planning Commission. The planning Commission shall then exercise its discretion and judgment to consider the possible adverse effects of the proposed conditional use permit and its judgment shall be based upon (but not limited to) the following factors: (1) Relationship to Municipal Comprehensive Plan. (2) The geographical area involved. • =109523 MU123-47 ti/Z 3Oyd 0 t C6LECZ t 9°Q I N3Ay210 '8 AC3NN3N WO213 8Z S I 96-9C-Oily Pam Sheldon August 30, 1996 • Page 2 (3) Whether such use will tend to or actually depredate the area in which it is proposed. (4) The character of the surrounding area. (5) The demonstrated need for such use. See Section 1125.01, subd. 1(e) of the Code. The Planning Commission then makes its findings of fact regarding these factors and makes a report and recommendation to the City Council. -The City Council considers the recommendations of the Planning Commission and determines whether the request for a conditional use permit meets all the criteria set forth in Section 1125.01, subd. 3 of the Code, including but not limited to making findings that: (2) the use will be sufficiently compatible or separated by distance or screering from adjacent residentially zoned or used lands so that existing homes will not be depreciated in value and there will be no deterrence to development of vacant land; (3) The structure and site have an appearance that will not have an adverse effect upon adjacent residential properties. The City Council then renders its decision to grant or deny the conditional use • permit based on whether the criteria for granting such a conditional use permit have been met. A decision of the City Council on a conditional use permit can be challenged in Ramsey County District Court by either the applicant or affected property owners. Issue No. 2: In considering a request for a variance to the zoning code, the Planning Commission meets as the Board of Adjustment Appeals (the "Board") and a different procedure is followed than in consideration of a conditional use permit. A variance to the provisions of the Zortrg Code may be issued by the Board only in the event that all of the criteria listed in Section 1125.02, subd. 2 of the Code are met. Pursuant to Section 1125.02, subd. 3 of the Code, if the Board acts in favor of the applicant, the decision is final and can only be challenged by affected property owners in district court. No appeal of the Board's decision to the City Council is provided for in the City Code (This may be an amendment that the p11*i►g Commission would want to consider in the future). If however, the Board denies the applicant's request for a variance, the applicant within 60 days from the decision of the Board may appeal the Board's decision to the City Council for the variance sought. The granting of a variance of the Zoning Code must be by a 2j3rds vote of the full Planning Commission serving as the Board pursuant to Section 1125.02, subd. 4f of the Code. Issue No. 3: The Planning Commission (serving either as the Pls+rning Commission • or as the Board) and the City Council retain full discretion to grant or deny a conditional use permit or variance request based on whether or not the CUP or saio9S23 1T125-47 x.is. =nda etCELEEZI9'QI N3AVaD '8 AQ3NN3}I'WO2i3 8Z'SI 96-0E-one Pam Sheldon August 30, 1996 Page 3 variance request meet the criteria as set forth in the Code. The Planning Commission and City Council are not in any way obligated by the actions or undertakings of a applicant prior to a public hearing on a conditional use permit or variance nor is either body bound by the earlier communications between city staff and an applicant. The only proper considerations for the Planning Commission or City Council to consider in granting or denying a conditional use permit request or variance request is whether such a request meets all of the criteria set forth in the Code, taking into consideration the testimony of the applicant and the reports and recommendations of the City plpnning staff. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Robert C. Long RCL/cm • i RCL109523 12S-a V/b 30Vd 0 L E6GEE Z 19:Q I N3AV D '8 AQ3NN3N°WO2l3 6Z =S I se-0fF-9f1H • A:sal0 AlIMF MEMORANDUM ❑ ST.PAUL,MN ❑ MINNEAPOLIS,MN U ST.CLOUD,MN ❑ CHIPPEWA FALLS,WI ❑ MADISON,WI TO: Pam Sheldon, Community Development Coordinator City of Mounds View FROM: Rocky Keehn DATE: August 23, 1996 RE: Mounds View, Minnesota Review of New Apostolic Church SEH No. A-MOUND9701.00 We have completed a review of the plans submitted to me dated August 15, 1996. The site does . provide storm water treatment prior to discharging into Spring Creek through grass swales and grass pond areas. This should mitigate for construction in the 100-foot wetland buffer area. Since the site will not have large amounts of cars on a daily basis, the grass treatment areas will provide enough water quality treatment. Also, the area which would have most of the cars parked on a daily basis drains to the larger grass area which would further improve the quality of runoff from the site. Our only recommendation on the grass ponding areas is that they not be sodded. A sandy topsoil should be placed and a rye grass seed used. This will provide better infiltration into the soil for the runoff. Rate of runoff should not be a problem, since the area drains over the grass area prior to discharging to the street. Our only concern is that the house just to the east of the site has a driveway that slopes towards the house. The only way to keep water in the street is a raised curb in front of the driveway. If the church discharges additional water to the street, it may overtop the curb and drain towards the house. The developer should investigate whether or not this will occur. If you have any question, please call me at 490-2026. tlo 0 rin , • SpLake Park lame _ ounds View FIRE DEPARTMENT - HEADQUARTERS Ogr Rece"ped Citi of Mounds View OCTOBER 16 1996. MS. PAM SHELDON COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW 2401 HIGHWAY 10 MOUNDS VIEW MN.55112 Dear Ms. Sheldon, This letter is to confirm my discussion with Jim Erickson regarding the New Apostolic Church, file# 492-96. The revised driveway providing a straight access to the parking lot meets all of the Fire Dept. concerns. If you have any questions please contact me at 638-9976 or 680-6705 pager. Yours sincerely, Mark Bishop, Fire arshal • S 1710 Highway 10 Spring Lake Park,MN 55432 Phone: 612-786-4436 Fax: 612-786-9617 Emergency: 911 • • A /(jjjf/ NewApostolic Church _ = Minneapolis Congregation September 8, 1996 City of Moundsview _ 2401 Hwy 10 Moundsview, MN 55112 ATTN: Pam Sheldon Re: Property located at 3025 County Rd H To the Mayor, City Council and Planning Commission of Moundsview: We the members of the New Apostolic Church Minneapolis Congregation want to thank you for your consideration of our plans to construct a church at the above referenced property in Moundsview. Our congregation was previously located at 21 Clarence Ave SE in Minnneapolis from the mid 1950s until last year. That building, which was approximately 70 years old, was renovated for our congregation and served us for 40+ • years. While for many of us our families grew up in that building, the cost to renovate and upgrade the facility to serve us into the future was not economical. There we had become accustomed to parallel parking on the hill in front of the large green tower in the Prospect Park community(we were unable to ever build a parking lot on our site). We also look forward to becoming an upstanding member of the Moundsview community for years to come. The congregations of the New Apostolic Church pride themselves on making their properties beautiful additions to the community. Our churches are not business centers, but are rather designed for the quiet gatherings of our member families. While our business representatives negotiate with you and the community so that we can fit ourselves in and develop the currently substandard condition of the lot, we want to portray our committment to increasing, rather than decreasing, the value of the neighborhood. We look forward to making Moundsview the new home of our congregation. Very truly yours, '; The Members of the New Apostolic Church . - v PCS,NL4 ik' `A\ DCr-N •Kr c0stti • K1/4 ti1/, jCePaiL � • fiCLY\4, ace 464 V /(,:; •„C , / Otti> 111. n. �. 1i c. 1=,,...1.1.• i�X c art/ l n S ' • • '- t4 -• '. ...,,,a-',...-4-t- . -,4....• • firA, --- - . --"-,'-" . . ' 7.4.4 1 4, •• •-..".-:.;.."-Mit..'. " .T-.11iPt..:?.:,..--iill-".... ::. - ,. NI , •..:,. • % ''.•Vs'Y'T'', 2 t ... ...,>.:'•:.`-:'-• • .... -.........• . , . ,it t„1014..--.r.......:,-, •.,,,:1, '..--.- - - . •--..".."-\,_._ -/ ... -s .A..-'-•-!. ,..i.. -: '''I''"c ' __ _ .. . • - _- -..• .._ - -7.1.-""."----- • ,..;.. .... . ....- . . . .. . . • 0 ft. ..... . ..-. ....... ....--- _..._ ; _. ___-_------__ um =1:it::;.: i ---.-- :ill. 1 ...,;---5-1-.----'...e . .. , . ., .r..7 -2*-W.OF •--- --,- . 41P'!"- . ._e• - __..._. • --• _--„:-....,, Oar? -'eaerr on/ e 44,47,5A/ea-,4 ye' . . . . ,,,,•,..".Z-1,-;-.4..4,-..,,k...-------,:••••• -, • 0 Sweeney, Borer & Ostrow Professional Association III Attorneys at Law Thomas M.Sweeney Suite 1200 Telephone George F.Borer Capital Centre (612)F222acsimil-2541e Paul T.Ostrow Patrick J.Sweeney 386 North Wabasha Street (612)223-5289 Robin D.Tomney St. Paul, Minnesota 55102 September 4, 1996 VIA FACSIMILE AND U.S. MAIL Ms. Pamela Sheldon Community Development Director City of Mounds View 2401 Highway 10 Mounds View, MN 55112 Re: Application for Conditional Use Permit - New Apostolic Church Our File No. 8529 Dear Ms. Sheldon: This letter is to advise you that we have been retained by 1111 Danny and Rochelle Moon. As you are aware, the Moons reside at 6929 Pleasant View Drive which is immediately adjacent to the property that is the subject of a Conditional Use Permit Application by New Apostolic Church at 3025 County Road H. Our clients are extremely concerned that the proposed development of this site, if approved, will have a serious impact on the value and enjoyment of their property. Quoting from your own Memorandum to the Planning Commission dated August 16, 1996, you state as follows: "testimony received from adjacent property owners indicate that questions remain about the compatibility of this project with adjacent residential uses, in particular, the width of the required setback between the property line and the parking lot. Addressing compatibility is fundamental to the Conditional Use Permit process. " (emphasis added) As is also stated in your Memorandum, Section 1125. 01 Subdivision 3b(2) of the Mounds View Code requires that in order to grant a Conditional Use Permit the City must find that "the use will be sufficiently compatible or separated by distance or screening from adjacent residentially zoned or used land so that existing homes will not be depreciated in value and there will be no deterrence to development of vacant land. " Subdivision (b) (3) of the Mounds View Code further precludes approval if the site has an adverse effect upon adjacent residential properties. Ms. Sheldon September 4, 1996 Page Two1111 Our investigation of this matter on behalf of our clients is continuing. However, based upon our initial conversation with them, review of the Mounds View Ordinances, and review of the proposed Site Plan, we believe that approval of the Conditional Use Permit for the site, as presently proposed, would be arbitrary and capricious. If this project is approved, the parking lot for the church will be extremely close to our client' s home. The serious impact on our client's property is obvious since their deck will look out over the parking lot and individuals parking at the site will literally be able to look right into their home. This is a completely unacceptable situation and our clients have no alternative but to use all legal remedies available to them in the event the City grants the Conditional Use Permit. These remedies of course include legal action against the City or application for a Writ of Mandamus to enjoin the issuance of the permit. It is clear that the City's Ordinances provide ample rationale in support of a denial of the Conditional Use Permit. We encourage the Planning Commission to recommend against approval of the Conditional Use Permit. Our clients intend to be1111 present at the Planning Commission Meeting to express their concerns. Although I will not be appearing at the Planning Commission Meeting, it is our intent to appear at the City Council Meeting when the issuance of the Conditional Use Permit is considered by the Council. Please distribute a copy of this letter to the Planning Commission for their information. I thank you in advance for your attention to this matter. Very truly yours, SWEENEY, BORER & OSTROW Auji . Paul T. Ostrow (dictated, but not read) PTO: kd cc: Danny and Rochelle Moon MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMNIISSION 411 RESOLUTION NO. 475-96 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST FOR THE NEW APOSTOLIC CHURCH TO CONSTRUCT A CHURCH FACILITY AT 3025 COUNTY ROAD H; PLANNING CASE NO. 452-96 WHEREAS, the New Apostolic Church has requested City approval to construct an approximately 4,108 square foot church building and an associated parking lot on property at 3025 County Road H; and, WHEREAS, this property is in the R-1 single family residential district, which requires the approval of a conditional use permit for the development of church facilities; and, WHEREAS, the purpose of the R-1 single family residential district is "to provide for low density single-family detached residential dwelling units and directly related, complementary uses"; and, 40WHEREAS, the purpose of conditional use permits is "to provide the City with a reasonable degree of discretion in determining the suitability of certain designated uses upon the general welfare, public health and safety"; and, WHEREAS, Section 1106.04 Subd. 1 of the Mounds View Municipal Code allows churches in the R-1 district provided certain criteria are met; and, WHEREAS, Section 1125.01 Subd. 1.e. of the Mounds View Municipal Code requires the Planning Commission to consider certain possible adverse effects of the proposed conditional use. Its judgement shall be based upon (but not limited to) the following factors: (1) Relationship to the 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 character of the surrounding area. (5) The demonstrated need for such use. WHEREAS, Section 1125.01 Subd. 3 of the Mounds View Municipal Code states that the City Council shall consider the advice and recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission and the effect of the proposed use on the Comprehensive Plan and upon the health, safety and general welfare of surrounding lands, and requires that certain findings be made for 40 the approval of a conditional use permit; and, Planning Commission Resolution No. 475-96 September 18, 1996 Page 2 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents regarding this conditional use permit request: 1. Project Location Plan / Rio Architects; September 11, 1996 2. Grading and Erosion Control Plan / Pioneer Engineering; September 11, 1996 3. Planning Application dated 7/15/96 4. Staff Report dated September 4, 1996 with attachments listed on pages 1 & 2 5. Staff Report dated September 18, 1996 with attachments listed on pages 1 & 2 6. Letter from Mark Bishop, Fire Marshal, Spring Lake Park/Blaine/Mounds View Fire Department dated September 4, 1996 and September 6, 1996 8. Letter from Sweeney, Borer & Ostrow dated September 4, 1996 9. Letter from the New Apostolic Church, Minneapolis Congregation (9/8/96) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission does hereby make the following findings of fact regarding the requirements set forth in Section 1106.04, Subd. 1 of the Mounds View Zoning Code. a. Front yard depths shall be a minimum of thirty five feet(35'). Complies. • b. Side yards shall be no less than thirty feet (30'). Complies. c. Adequate screening from abutting residential uses and landscaping is provided in compliance with Section 1103.08 of this Title. (A copy of this Section is attached.) The applicant has not provided adequate screening from abutting residential uses in that the width of the landscape buffer areas along the property lines are less than is typical for churches in the community. The proposed plan shows landscaped buffers of 10 feet along the east end of the north property line and along the east property line, between the parking lot and adjacent single family homes. Parking lots are not typical improvements in the R-1 single family residential district and represent a more intensive use of property than is typical for this district. The minimum width of landscaped buffer areas between parking lots on other church sites in the community and adjacent residential uses is 14 feet with the typical width being 30 feet. The type of landscape material proposed will not provide an effective screen at least eight feet in height. This criteria is not met. 410 Planning Commission Resolution No. 475-96 September 18, 1996 Page 3 d. Adequate off-street parking and access is provided on the site or on lots directly abutting or directly across a public street to the principal use in compliance with Chapter 1121 of this Title and that such parking is adequately screened and landscaped from surrounding and abutting residential uses in compliance with Section 1103.08 of this Title. The proposed plan provides 29 parking spaces of which two are compact size and two are for handicapped. This number is sufficient to meet Code requirements with a limit of 115 seats for the seating capacity of the Church. The size of the parking spaces, number of compact spaces, and drive aisle widths used meets Code requirements. The curb cut on County Road H is 20 feet and the curb cut on Pleasant View Drive is 12 feet, which meet the maximum width of 22 feet allowed in the R-1 district. The Fire Department has indicated that there is sufficient access and maneuvering room for emergency vehicles if the building is sprinklered. The plans meets the numerical and dimensional requirements of the Code. They do not meet the requirements of Section 1103.08, as is stated under c. above. e. Adequate off-street loading and service entrances are provided and regulated where applicable by Chapter 1122 of this Title. Off-street loading is not required for this type of use or size of building. IDf. The provisions of subdivision 1125.01(1)e of this Title are considered and satisfactorily met ('This section is quoted below.) Adverse Effects: The Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider possible adverse effects of the proposed amendment or conditional use. Its judgment shall be based upon (but not limited to)the following factors: (1) Relationship to the 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 character of the surrounding area. (5) The demonstrated need for the use. The geographical area involved in this application is a residential neighborhood bordered on the south by County Road H which serves as the municipal border. The neighborhood is characterized by deep, oversized lots and mature trees. Because the lots are large, the typical building coverage is low. The applicant's proposal would be a more intensive use of the lot than is typical of the neighborhood. At the size proposed, and with coverage of 61% of the lot with impervious material, the proposal is out of character for the neighborhood and does not meet this criteria. The applicant has testified of the difficulty encountered by his clients in trying to find vacant property which would allow development of a church near to where most of the church members live. The church congregation includes members who live in the Mounds View area. There appears to be a demonstrated need for the use. Planning Commission Resolution No. 475-96 September 18, 1996410 Page 4 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission does hereby make the following findings of fact regarding this conditional use permit request with respect to the criteria set forth in Section 1125.01 Subd. 3.b. for the review of conditional use permits. The criteria are noted below, and have been grouped to avoid repetitive findings. (1) The use will not create an excessive burden on existing parks, schools, streets and other public facilities and utilities will serve or are proposed to serve the area. (7) The use will not cause traffic hazards or congestion. (8) Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and necessary facilities have been or will be provided. The New Apostolic Church proposes to hold Sunday School at 8:45-9:30 AM and two Sunday church services: 10:00-11:00 AM and 5:00-6:00 PM. The Church also holds a Wednesday evening service from 8:00-9:00 PM. The current congregation is approximately 55 people. Because the use is a church, rather than residential homes, it is not anticipated to create a demand on parks or schools. Both water and sewer service adequate to support this use is available to the site. The site is served by two streets, County Road H and Pleasant View Drive. Given the limited number of services and the size of the congregation, the amount of traffic is anticipated to be low and will occur on1111 weekends or evening rather than during peak commute times. The City Engineer has reviewed the applicant's drainage proposal and indicated that the rate of runoff should not be a problem and the grass treatment areas will provide enough water quality treatment. Drainage will now be directed to County Road H and will flow through grassed areas to allow sediments to percolate before runoff water leaves the site. Recommendations from the City Engineer that the grass treatment areas be seeded rather than sodded are addressed as a contingency in the resolution on the development review. The Rice Creek Watershed District has indicated to staff that a permit from them is not required. The proposal meets criteria (1), (7) and (8) stated above. (2) The use will be sufficiently compatible or separated by distance or screening from adjacent residentially zoned or used land so that existing homes will not be depreciated in value and there will be no deterrence to development of vacant land. (3) The structure and site shall have an appearance that will not have an adverse effect upon adjacent residential properties. This proposal would result in a church development on a single residential lot measuring one-half acre, which would be the smallest site used for a church in Mounds View. The next smallest site is 1.59 acres (or three times as large) and the average size site is 3.7 acres. The proposed structure is 1-1/2 stories high with a wall height of 13.5 to 16 feet, and an overall height of 26.5 to 29.5 feet above grade. The proposed footprint is 1054 feet. The typical homes in this neighborhood are one story bungalow-style homes, which • Planning Commission Resolution No. 475-96 . September 18, 1996 Page 5 are much lower to the ground and have smaller building footprints. The applicant has provided a 10 foot wide landscaped buffer along the east property line, and a buffer area ranging from 10 to 24 feet along the north property line, between the parking lot and the adjacent single family residences. The buffer areas are less than is typical of other Mounds View churches. The range for buffer areas between parking lots and adjacent residential uses is 14 - 63 feet with the typical width at 30 feet. The type of landscape material proposed will not provide an effective screen at least eight feet in height. Parking lots are not typical improvements in the R-1 single family residential district and represent a more intensive use of property than is typical for this district. Testimony has been received from adjacent property owners that the proposed plan will have an adverse effect on the enjoyment of their property due to the closeness of the parking lot to the property line, and that a landscaped buffer area of at least 15 feet in width is needed to provide an adequate buffer. Criteria (2) and (3) are not met. (4) The use, in the opinion of the City Council, is reasonably related to the overall needs of the City and to the existing land use. (6) The use is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. • The Zoning Code envisions the development of churches in residential neighborhoods, and there are five other churches in Mounds View in residential districts. The applicant has testified that a number of the members of this church are from the Mounds View area, and desire to locate the church closer to their homes. (5) The use is consistent with the purposes of the Zoning Code and the purposes of the zoning district in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use. According to the Zoning Code, "the purpose of the R-1, single family district is to provide for low density single-family detached residential dwelling units and directly related, complementary uses." Churches are allowed in the R-1 district but require approval of a conditional use permit. Churches, therefore, are regarded as complementary uses which require special, discretionary review. The R-1 district is intended for low density, i.e. low intensity uses. There is insufficient room on the property to meet the parking requirements and provide the type of buffer between the parking lot and the adjacent residences which is typical of other churches in Mounds View. The proposed church development, with a building of 4,108 square feet on two levels, with a building footprint of 2,054 square feet, and a 29-space parking lot, does not fit with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. This criteria is not met. • Planning Commission Resolution No. 475-96 September 18, 1996 Page 6 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission does hereby find that the conditional use permit . request as submitted by the New Apostolic Church for 3025 County Road H does not meet the criteria set forth in Section 1106.04 Subd 1. nor Section 1125.01 in their entirety. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council of the City of Mounds View that the conditional use permit for development of a church facility at 3025 County Road H as presented by the New Apostolic Church in its plans dated September 11, 1996 (project location and landscaping / Rio Architects; grading and erosion control plan I Pioneer Engineering) and the elevations and details from the construction drawings prepared by LRK design group (sheets L-2, A-2 and A-3) be denied. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the staff is directed to forward this resolution and recommendation to the City Council in advance of the minutes. Adopted this 18th day of September, 1996. Jerry Peterson, Chairperson ATTEST: Pamela Sheldon, Community Development Director (SEAL) • r ,, MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION IIIRESOLUTION NO. 476-96 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF A DEVELOPMENT REVIEW REQUEST FOR THE NEW APOSTOLIC CHURCH TO CONSTRUCT A CHURCH FACILITY AT 3025 COUNTY ROAD H; PLANNING CASE NO. 452-96 WHEREAS, the New Apostolic Church has requested City approval for a development review to construction an approximately 4,050 square foot church building and associated parking lot on property at 3025 County Road H; and, WHEREAS, Chapter 1006 of the Mounds View Municipal Code requires that a development review be conducted for this and similar proposals; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents regarding this development review request: 1. Project Location Plan / Rio Architects; September 11, 1996 2. Grading and Erosion Control Plan / Pioneer Engineering; September 11, 1996 i 3. Planning Application dated 7/15/96 4. Staff Report dated September 4, 1996 with attachments listed on pages 1 & 2 5. Staff Report dated September 18, 1996 with attachments listed on pages 1 & 2 6. Letter from Mark Bishop, Fire Marshal, Spring Lake Park/Blaine/Mounds View Fire Department dated September 4, 1996 and September 6, 1996 8. Letter from Sweeney, Borer & Ostrow dated September 4, 1996 9. Letter from the New Apostolic Church, Minneapolis Congregation (9/8/96) WHEREAS, the Mounds View Zoning Code requires approval of a conditional use permit for the development of a church in the R-1 single family residential district; and, WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has made findings that the application from the New Apostolic Church does not meet the required criteria for issuance of a conditional use permit for a church on this property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council of the City of Mounds View that the development review for development of a church facility at 3025 County Road H as presented by the New Apostolic Church in its plans dated September 11, 1996 (project location and landscaping / Rio Architect; grading and erosion control plan/Pioneer Engineering) and the elevations and details from the construction drawings prepared by LRK design group (sheets L-2, A-2 and A-3) be 0 denied. Planning Commission Resolution No. 476-96 September 18, 1996 • Page 2 Adopted this 18th day of September, 1996 Jerry Peterson, Chairman ATTEST: Pamela Sheldon, Community Development Director (SEAL) • • RESOLUTION NO. 5036 illCITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA A RESOLUTION DENYING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE NEW APOSTOLIC CHURCH TO CONSTRUCT A CHURCH FACILITY AT 3025 COUNTY ROAD H; PLANNING CASE NO. 452-96 WHEREAS, the New Apostolic Church has requested City approval to construct an approximately 4,050 square foot church building and an associated parking lot on property at 3025 County Road H; and, WHEREAS, on August 28, 1996, the contract owner of the property, Curtis J. Lingwall, provided to the City of Mounds View, a letter stating that he gave authorization for the National Organization of the New Apostolic Church and Stahl Construction to apply for a conditional use permit for the property at 3025 County Road H; and, WHEREAS, on October 28, 1996, Len Kolb, the Building Office Manager for the National Building Office of the New Apostolic Church United States of America, 1703 Peninsula Drive, Erie, PA 16505, indicated to the City that the New Apostolic Church does not have an • active purchase agreement in place for the property at 3025 County Road H, and that an extension of the purchase agreement between the New Apostolic Church and Curtis J. Lingwall had not been granted by the contract owner; and, WHEREAS, on October 28, 1996, Bill Diem of Stahl Construction, who filed the application for the conditional use permit on behalf of the New Apostolic Church, when given the opportunity by City staff, was unable to provide a current valid purchase agreement indicating that the New Apostolic Church has a property interest in the property at 3025 County Road H. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council does hereby deny the request for a conditional use permit for development of a church facility at 3025 County Road H based on the fact that the applicant does not have a property interest in this property nor the permission of the property owner to proceed with this application. Adopted this 29th day of October, 1996 Jerome Linke, Mayor ATTEST: IIICharles Whiting, City Clerk-Administrator (SEAL) I ' RESOLUTION NO. 5037 III CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA A RESOLUTION DENYING A DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FOR 1HE NEW APOSTOLIC CHURCH TO CONSTRUCT A CHURCH FACILITY AT 3025 COUNTY ROAD H; PLANNING CASE NO. 452-96 WHEREAS, the New Apostolic Church has requested City approval to construct an approximately 4,050 square foot church building and an associated parking lot on property at 3025 County Road H; and, WHEREAS, on August 28, 1996, the contract owner of the property, Curtis J. Lingwall, provided to the City of Mounds View, a letter stating that he gave authorization for the National Organization of the New Apostolic Church and Stahl Construction to apply for a conditional use permit for the property at 3025 County Road H; and, WHEREAS, on October 28, 1996, Len Kolb, the Building Office Manager for the National Building Office of the New Apostolic Church United States of America, 1703 Peninsula Drive, Erie, PA 16505, indicated to the City that the New Apostolic Church does not have an active purchase agreement in place for the property at 3025 County Road H, and that an • extension of the purchase agreement between the New Apostolic Church and Curtis J. Lingwall had not been granted by the contract owner; and, WHEREAS, on October 28, 1996, Bill Diem of Stahl Construction, who filed the application for the development review on behalf of the New Apostolic Church, when given the opportunity by City staff, was unable to provide a current valid purchase agreement indicating that the New Apostolic Church has a property interest in the property at 3025 County Road H. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council does • hereby deny the request for a development review for development of a church facility at 3025 County Road H based on the fact that the applicant'does not have a property interest in this property nor the permission of the property owner to proceed with this application. Adopted this 29th day of October, 1996 Jerome Linke, Mayor ATTEST: IIICharles Whiting, City Clerk-Administrator (SEAL) CM°OP REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION Agenda Section ;, 'lf titii1 t; STAFF REPORT Report Number 1 — iiQ� '� Report Date 10/15/96 • }A �;�,�; CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE Special Order of Bus. *4'4'Ai f, R OctoberConsent Agenda Panne Public Hearings X Council Business Item Description: Consideration of adoption of Resolution No. 5006 denying a development review for the New Apostolic Church to construct a church facility at 3025 County Road H; and Consideration of adoption of Resolution No. 5008 approving a development review for the New Apostolic Church to construct a church facility at 3025 County Road H; Planning Case No. 452-96 Administrator's Review/Recommendation: -No Comments to supplement this report -Comments attached Explanation/Summary (attach supplement sheets as necessary) Summary: Stahl Construction, on behalf of the New Apostolic Church has submitted an application for a development review for a church facility at 3025 County Road H. The church facility will include a 4,050 square foot building, on two levels of 2,025 square foot each, and a 27-space parking lot. The parking lot is served by two access driveways: the main entrance and exit onto County Road H and an exit onto Pleasant View Drive. church auditorium will seat 98 people. • According to Section 1006.06 Subd. 2 of the Municipal Code, all proposed industrial, commercial and residential developments and expansions of existing facilities, except developments where public utilities and streets have previously been installed and the erection of no more than two (2) detached single-family dwellings are planned, must be reviewed by the City Planning and Zoning Commission and approved by the City Council for compliance with development requirements. (This application is also subject to a requirement for approval of a conditional use permit, which is discussed in a separate report scheduled on this agenda under "Public Hearings".) Dimensional Requirements Required Provided Met/Not Met Lot Area 12,500 s.f. 22,520 s.f. yes (1) Lot Width 100 feet 100 feet yes Building Height 2.5 stories; 45 feet 26'9" to ridge yes (1) 21'6" to midpoint Steeple No limit 15' from roofline Building Setbacks Front 35 feet 35 feet yes (1) Side 30 feet 30 feet yes (1) Rear 30 feet 40 feet yes (1) Parking Lot Setbacks• 5 feet 12-24 feet yes (1) arking 1 space per 4 seats; 25 + yes (1) 98 seats = 25 spaces 2 handicapped Compact Parking Allowed no more than 10% = 3 2 yes Mayor and City Council Planning Case NO. 452-96: New Apostolic Church (Development Review) October 15, 1996 Page 2 • (1) Section 1125.01 Subd. 3.c.(1)-(8) states that the City Council may impose additional conditions on the granting of a conditional use permit which the City Council considers necessary to protect the best interest of the surrounding area or the community as whole. These include, among other items, increasing the required lot size or yard dimension, limiting the height, size or location of buildings, and increasing the number of required off- street parking spaces. Parking and Access Points As noted above, the proposal shows 27 parking spaces: 19 regular spaces at 9 x 20 feet, 4 regular parallel spaces at 9 x 22 feet, 2 compact parallel spaces at 9 x 20 feet, and 2 handicapped spaces at 8-1/2 x 20 feet and a five foot aisle between. The number of spaces, size of spaces and aisle widths meet Code requirements (2). The issue of whether there is adequate screening and landscaping between the parking lot and surrounding and abutting residential uses is discussed under "Landscaping" below. The curb cut on County Road H is 21 feet and the curb cut on Pleasant View Drive is 12 feet at the property line, which meet the maximum width of 22 feet allowed in the R-1 district. The Fire Department has stated the driveway onto County Road H will be sufficient for emergency access, if the building is sprinklered. (Pending receipt of letter from Fire Marshal.) Landscaping This issue has been discussed extensively in the report on the conditional use permit request which must be • granted for the development review to be granted (see page 7.) The applicant is proposing to preserve 21 mature trees existing on the site, to add 25 evergreen trees and 2 deciduous trees, and to plant a lilac hedge and numerous shrubs. The City Forester has reviewed the plan, and finds it sound and, in his judgement, will provide buffering to adjacent properties once the landscaping matures. Staff is recommending, on the advice of the City Forester, that White pine be substituted for the Austrian pines in the northwest corner and along the eastern edge of the site. He also suggested that where Black Hills spruce and the White or Austrian pines are planted together that they be spread further apart to allow for the differences in branching patterns. Thee is some difficulty in transplanting evergreens at eight feet, in order to get the height required by the Code. The City Forester has suggested that they be specified at 6-7 feet in the list of plant materials. These items have been addressed by contingencies in the attached resolutions. Signage The Zoning Code is close to silent on the question of signage for churches. Community facilities such as churches, schools, community centers and recreational buildings, and some businesses such as day nurseries (2) The Mounds View Zoning Code does not specify sizes for parallel parking spaces. Staff reviewed the following sources regarding sizes: - Minnesota Department of Transportation: range of 22 to 26 feet for,regular spaces - Traffic Engineering Handbook, Institute of Transportation Engineers: 22 feet for regular spaces - Highway Engineering (Oglesby and Hicks): range of 22 to 26 feet for regular spaces Staff also consulted with several cities in the vicinity. None of them had dimensions for parallel spaces. Mayor and City Council Planning Case NO. 452-96: New Apostolic Church (Development Review) October 15, 1996 • are allowed in residential zoning districts, but the sign regulations for these districts only pertain to residential uses. Staff has noted that other churches in the community have signs, usually modest-sized, ground-mounted signs. Our recollection is that none of the churches have wall-mounted signs, although at least one has a decorative window with religious symbols. The closest regulations would be for neighborhood businesses in the B-1 district, which are allowed signs not exceeding 100 square feet of total area. The applicant is proposing the following signs for the New Apostolic Church: • wall-mounted sign (25.625 s.f.) and cross (46 s.f.) on the west elevation (71.625 square feet) • wall-mounted sign (19.25 s.f.) and cross (25.5 s.f.) on the east elevation (44.75 square feet) • ground mounted sign announcing times of services (21 square feet) • temporary sign announcing the construction of the church 2.5 x 8 feet(20 square feet) The permanent signage totals 137.375 square feet; temporary signage totals 20 square feet. Staff is recommending that only the ground sign be used to identify the denomination of the church, and therefore that this sign be made larger (for example 4 feet by 10 feet or 40 square feet). The crosses could remain on the building as religious symbols, but would have to be adjusted in size so that overall total is no more than 100 square feet. Staff would suggest the following adjustments be made: 40 sq.ft. for the ground mounted sign, 39 sq.ft. for the cross on the west elevation, and 21 sq.ft. for the cross on the east elevation. The applicant has not indicated where the ground-mounted sign is to be placed. Staff would suggest it face County Road H the main entrance. Contingencies have been included in the resolutions for the conditional use permit development to require revisions to the plan package to show the signs permitted and the recommended adjustments in sizes, if the City Council elects to approve this application. Lighting The applicant has not provided a lighting plan with their submittal. Staff understands from conversations with the applicant that they are planning the following lighting on the site: Parking lot lighting using downcast fixtures on 1-2 poles which will be 18' or less in height; lighting over the entrances on the south and north side of the building; soffit lighting under the eaves on the north and south side to create a "lightwash" on the walls of the building, and walkway lighting to the front entrance. The applicant also desire to backlight the sign and cross on the west side of the building but not the east side. Staff assumes that the applicant desires to light the ground-mounted sign. Lighting is a concern to the adjacent property owners. Staff is recommending that a lighting plan be submitted, for review and approval by staff prior to the issuance of any building permits. We are concerned about the height of the lighting and how it will be shielded, and have no design information. Contingencies have been included in the resolutions for the conditional use permit and the development review on this issue, should the City Council elect to approve this application. Drainage and Wetland Buffer Area east half of the site is located in the 100-foot wetland buffer area. The proposal shows a portion of the ng lot, but not the church building itself in this area. Construction of the parking lot will require approval of a wetland alteration permit by the City Council. Approval of this permit is required prior to issuance of any grading or building permits in the contingencies in Resolution No. 5008. Mayor and City Council Planning Case NO. 452-96: New Apostolic Church (Development Review) October 15, 1996 Page 4 • The City Engineer has reviewed the plan and indicated that the rate of runoff should not be a problem and the grass treatment areas proposed will provide enough water quality treatment. Drainage will now be directed to County Road H and will flow through grassed areas to allow sediments to percolate before water leaves the site. The City Engineer has indicated that this design should mitigate for construction in the 100-foot wetland buffer area. The Rice Creek Watershed District has stated that a permit from them is not required. Report Summary Approval of the development review for the New Apostolic Church is dependent on the City Council's action on the conditional use permit request, since churches cannot be developed in the R-1 district without obtaining a CUP. Staff has prepared two resolutions, one indicating denial of the development review (Resolution No. 5006) and one indicating approval of the development review (Resolution No. 5008), to cover either possibility. The proposal complies with the dimensional requirements in the Zoning Code (lot size, lot width, building heights, building and parking lot setbacks, number and size of parking spaces provided). The City Engineer and the City Forester have reviewed the plan and found it adequate with respect to drainage, water quality treatment and type of landscaping proposed, with certain modifications. These modifications are addressed in the contingencies in Resolution No. 5008. Staff is recommending that the signage proposed with this application be revised to reduce the overall amount and to remove any wording from the walls of the buildin consistent with other churches in Mounds View. The primary signage on the site would be a 40 square foot, ground-mounted sign if staff's recommendation is followed. Staff is also recommending a lighting plan be submitted, and that lighting be restricted as stated in the contingencies in Resolution No. 5008. Recommendation Planning Commission: Adopted Resolution No. 476-96 recommending denial of a conditional use permit for the New Apostolic Church to construct a church facility at 3025 County Road H; Planning Case No. 452-96, by a vote of 4 ayes and 3 nays. Staff Adopt Resolution No. 5005 denying a development review for the New Apostolic Church to construct a church facility at 3025 County Road H; Planning Case No. 452-96. If the City Council desires to approve the development review, Resolution 5008 approving a development review for the New Apostolic Church to construct a church facility at 3025 County Road H; Planning Case No. 452-96 has been prepared and is attached. Appropriate findings have been included as well as a list of contingencies recommended by staff. (Please note that the documents referred to in Resolution 5008 as being available for City Council review have been attached to the report on the conditional use permit, and have not been attached to this report in order to save copying costs.) A/Yl/L4/L \R4U /b(47\ _ 1111 � Pamela Sheldon, Community Development ment Director B:1CHURCH.CC2 RESOLUTION NO. 5006 • CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA A RESOLUTION DENYING A DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FOR THE NEW APOSTOLIC CHURCH TO CONSTRUCT A CHURCH FACILITY AT 3025 COUNTY ROAD H; • PLANNING CASE NO. 452-96 WHEREAS, the New Apostolic Church has requested City approval for a development review to construction an approximately 4,050 square foot church building and associated parking lot on property at 3025 County Road H; and, WHEREAS, Chapter 1006 of the Mounds View Municipal Code requires that a development review be conducted for this and similar proposals; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has received and had available for review the following documents regarding this development review request: 1. Application dated 7/15/96 2. Zoning Map • 3. Wetland Zone District Map 4. Letter from Curt Lingwall, dated 8/28/96, giving permission from owner for the filing of the conditional use permit application 5. Letter from Bob Long, City Attorney, dated 8/30/96 6. Letter from Rocky Keehn, City Engineer, dated 8/23/96 7. Letter from Mark Bishop, Fire Marshal, dated 10/16/96 8. Letter from New Apostolic Church, Minneapolis Congregation, dated 9/8/96 9. Letter from Sweeney, Borer & Ostrow dated 9/4/96 10. Section 1103.08 from the Mounds View Municipal Code 11. Staff Report to Planning Commission dated 9/18/96 12. Minutes from Planning Commission meeting on 8/7/96 13. Minutes from Planning Commission meeting on 9/4/96 14. Minutes from Planning Commission meeting on 9/18/96 15. Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 475-96 and 476-96 16. Boundary Survey prepared by Pioneer Engineering, printed 10/7/96 17. Grading and Erosion Control Plan prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated 9/26/96 18. Landscaping Plan prepared by Rio Architects, dated 9/30/96 19. Floorplans and Elevations prepared by LRK design group, received 10/7/96 WHEREAS, the Mounds View Zoning Code requires approval of a conditional use permit for the development of a church in the R-1 single family residential district; and, 1110 • City Council Resolution No. 5006 October 29, 1996 Page 2 WHEREAS, the Mounds View City Council has made findings that the application from the New Apostolic Church does not meet the required criteria for issuance of a conditional use permit for a church on this property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council does hereby deny the development review for development of a church facility at 3025 County Road H as presented by the New Apostolic Church in its plans dated September 26 and 30, 1996 and October 7, 1996. Adopted this 29th day of October, 1996 Jerome Linke, Mayor ATTEST: 1111 Charles Whiting, City Clerk-Administrator (SEAL) B:\DRRBSO.DEN S RESOLUTION NO. 5008 110 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA • A RESOLUTION APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FOR TIlE NEW APOSTOLIC CHURCH TO CONSTRUCT A CHURCH FACILITY AT 3025 COUNTY ROAD H; PLANNING CASE NO. 452-96 WHEREAS, the New Apostolic Church has requested City approval to construct an approximately 4,050 square foot church building and an associated parking lot on property at 3025 County Road H and described as: KNOLLWOOD PARK WEST 225 FEET OF LOT 75 WHEREAS, Chapter 1006 of the Mounds View Municipal Code requires that a development review be conducted for this and similar proposals; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has received and had available for review the following • documents regarding this conditional use permit request: 1. Application dated 7/15/96 2. Zoning Map 3. Wetland Zone District Map 4. Letter from Curt Lingwall, dated 8/28/96,giving permission from owner for the filing of the conditional use permit application 5. Letter from Bob Long, City Attorney, dated 8/30/96 6. Letter from Rocky Keehn, City Engineer, dated 8/23/96 7. Letter from Mark Bishop, Fire Marshal, dated 10/16/96 8. Letter from New Apostolic Church, Minneapolis Congregation, dated 9/8/96 9. Letter from Sweeney, Borer&Ostrow dated 9/4/96 10. Section 1103.08 from the Mounds View Municipal Code 11. Staff Report to Planning Commission dated 9/18/96 12. Minutes from Planning Commission meeting on 8/7/96 13. Minutes from Planning Commission meeting on 9/4/96 14. Minutes from Planning Commission meeting on 9/18/96 15. Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 475-96 and 476-96 16. Boundary Survey prepared by Pioneer Engineering, printed 10/7/96 17. Grading and Erosion Control Plan prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated 9/26/96 18. Landscaping Plan prepared by Rio Architects, dated 9/30/96 19. Floorplans and Elevations prepared by LRK design group, received 10/7/96 WHEREAS, the Mounds View Zoning Code requires approval of a conditional use permit 0 for the development of a church in the R-1 single family residential district; and, City Council Resolution No. 5008 October 29, 1996110 Page 2 WHEREAS, the Mounds View City Council has made findings that the application from the New Apostolic Church meets the required criteria for issuance of a conditional use permit; and, WHEREAS, the Mounds View City Council does hereby find that the development plan as proposal meets the requirements for dimensions, parking and access, landscaping, signage, lighting, and drainage and wetland buffer area as stated in the staff report dated October 15, 1996 and as summarized below: Dimensional Requirements Required Provided Met/Not Met Lot Area 12,500 s.f. 22,520 s.f. yes (1) Lot Width 100 feet 100 feet yes Building Height 2.5 stories; 45 feet 26'9" to ridge yes (1) 21'6" to midpoint Steeple No limit 15' from roofline Building Setbacks Front 35 feet 35 feet yes (1) Side 30 feet 30 feet yes (1) Rear 30 feet 40 feet yes (1) Parking Lot Setbacks 5 feet 12-24 feet yes (1) • Parking 1 space per 4 seats; 25 + yes (1) 98 seats = 25 spaces 2 handicapped Compact Parking Allowed no more than 10% = 3 2 yes (1) Section 1125.01 Subd. 3.c.(1)-(8) states that the City Council may impose additional conditions on the granting of a conditional use permit which the City Council considers necessary to protect the best interest of the surrounding area or the community as whole. These include, among other items, increasing the required lot size or yard dimension, limiting the height, size or location of buildings, and increasing the number of required off-street parking spaces. Parking and Access Points The number of parking spaces provided meets the requirements of the Zoning Code, if the seating capacity of the church auditorium is limited to 98 seats and there is no concurrent use of the church auditorium and fellowship hall. The width of the access drives is less than the maximum allowed of 22 feet. (The drive onto County Road H is 21 feet, and onto Pleasant View Drive is 12 feet, at the property line.) The Fire Department has stated the driveway onto County Road H will be sufficient for emergency access, if the building is sprinklered. (Pending receipt of letter from Fire Marshal.) City Council Resolution No. 5008 SOctober 29, 1996 Page 3 Landscaping The applicant is proposing to preserve 21 mature trees existing on the site, to add 25 evergreen trees and 2 deciduous trees, and to plant a lilac hedge and numerous shrubs. The landscaping plan with revisions required by the contingencies stated in this resolution is acceptable. It will provide an evergreen screen along the north and east property lines, and a lilac hedge along a portion of the north property line, sufficient to buffer the adjacent residential properties. The species of plant materials are suitable for the site and climate conditions. Signage The applicant is proposing signage on the west and east elevations of the building, a ground- mounted sign announcing services, and a temporary sign announcing the construction of the church. The contingencies in this resolution require this signage plan to be revised to reduce the overall signage to 100 square feet, and to remove any wall-mounted signs announcing the church denomination consistent with the signage allowed for other Mounds View churches. The contingencies allow for the ground mounted sign to be increased from 21 square feet to 40 square feet. SLighting No lighting plan has been submitted as part of this application. The contingencies stated in this resolution require that a lighting plan, consistent with the requirements stated in the contingencies, be submitted and approved by the Community Development Director prior to issuance of any grading and building permits. Lighting will be required to be subdued, with no light spillage or glare onto adjacent residential properties. Drainage and Wetland Buffer Area The east half of the site is located in the 100-foot wetland buffer area. The proposal shows a portion of the parking lot, but not the church building itself in this area. Construction of the parking lot will require approval of a wetland alteration permit by the City Council. Approval of this permit is required prior to issuance of any grading or building permits in the contingencies in this resolution. The City Engineer has reviewed the plan and indicated that the rate of runoff should not be a problem and the grass treatment areas proposed will provide enough water quality treatment. Drainage will now be directed to County Road H and will flow through grassed areas to allow sediments to percolate before water leaves the site. The City Engineer has indicated that this design should mitigate for construction in the 100-foot wetland buffer area. • The Rice Creek Watershed District has stated that a permit from them is not required. i City Council Resolution No. 5008 October 29, 1996 S Page 4 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Mounds has recommended in Resolution No. 476-96 that the development review request from the New Apostolic Church for development of church facility at 3025 County Road H be denied; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Mounds View has considered the recommendation of the Planning Commission, and does hereby find that the development review request as proposed by the New Apostolic Church for 3025 County Road H meets the requirements set forth in the Mounds View Municipal Code. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council does hereby approved the development review request for development of a church facility at 3025 County Road H as presented by the New Apostolic Church in the grading and erosion control plans (9/26/96), landscaping plans (9/30/96), and the floorplans and elevations (received 10/7/96), subject to the following contingencies: 1. The granting of this development review is contingent upon the granting of a wetland alteration permit, and shall be null and void if this approval is not received within 120 days of the date on which City Council acts to grant this development review. In no event shall any building permits be issued until such time as the wetland alteration permit • has been granted. 2. Prior to issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall: a. Revise the landscaping plan to substitute White pine for Austrian pine in the northwest corner of the site and along the eastern site boundary. The spacing of the pine and spruce shall be adjusted to assure that sufficient room is available for the different branching structures of these two types of evergreens. b. Revise the landscaping plan to show the height specified for the evergreen trees shall be 6-7 feet. The applicant shall endeavor to obtain seven foot evergreen trees for planting on the site. c. Revise the landscaping plan to add a note which states: "The property owner shall be responsible for the replacement of any landscape materials which die during the lifetime of this project, including the existing mature trees on the site shown as being retained on this landscape plan. The size and species of landscape materials used for replacement shall be approved by the Community Development Director, after consultation with the City Forester." d. Add a detail sheet to the plan package which shows the temporary construction signage for the church, the permanent ground mounted sign announcing the • City Council Resolution No. 5008 October 29, 1996 Page 5 denomination of the church and times of its services, and the directional signage at driveway onto Pleasant View Drive which states "Exit Only; Do Not Enter". The size of the temporary construction signage shall be no more than 2 feet 6 inches x 8 feet, and shall be ground-mounted on posts with an overall height of no more than five feet. The sign shall not be placed in the sight triangle at the intersection of County Road H and Pleasant View Drive. The sign shall face County Road H and shall not be illuminated. The size of the sign announcing services shall be no more than 4 feet x 10 feet and shall be ground-mounted on posts, with the overall height of the sign no more than 4.5 feet from the ground. This sign may have external, ground-mounted illumination, which may be turned on during evening and nighttime hours. The directional sign at Pleasant View Drive shall be no more than 1-1/2 foot x 3 feet and shall be ground-mounted on posts, with the overall height of the sign no more than three feet from the ground. Notes stating these requirements shall be included on the detail sheet. e. The elevations shall be modified to remove the name of the church from the walls, and shall reduce the size of the cross on the east side to 21 square feet, and the cross on the west side to 39 sq.ft. A note shall be added to the elevations which states: "Signs shall be allowed at the size and location as shown on this plan, and as shown • on the detail sheet included in this plan package. Signs shall comply with the design and construction standards contained in Chapter 1008 of the Mounds View Municipal Code. Signs require approval of a separate permit prior to installation. The total signage on the east end of the building shall be 21 square feet and shall consist of a cross only, and on the west end of the building shall be 39 square feet and shall consist of a cross only. No sign announcing the name of the church shall be wall- mounted. The cross on the east end of the building shall not be illuminated. The cross on the west of the building may be illuminated, but only between the hours 5:00 PM and 9:00 PM each evening. The level of illumination shall be approved by the Director of Community Development, and shall be subdued so as to prevent glare onto properties either abutting or across abutting streets." f. The elevations shall be revised to show the steeple at nine feet above the ridgeline of the roof. g. Provide five (5) copies of the complete plan package including the revised landscaping plan and the new detail sheet to the Director of Community Development. City Council Resolution No. 5008 October 29, 1996 Page 6 3. The auditorium contains bench-style pews. The seating capacity in the church auditorium shall be calculated based on 22" of bench space for each seat. The seating capacity shall be limited to 98 seats. Any increase in seating capacity shall require the approval of an amended conditional use permit by the City of Mounds View. 4. Prior to issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall obtain approval from the Community Development Director for a lighting plan showing any exterior lighting to be installed on the site. The lighting plan shall comply with the requirements stated in this resolution. Parking lot lighting shall be mounted on poles on poles and not on the building. Poles shall not exceed 18 feet in height. The luminaires shall be limited to 250 watts, have sharp cutoffs and downcast fixtures to direct light onto the parking lot and not onto adjacent properties. The number of pole mounted lights shall be determined by the Community Development Director as part of the approval of the lighting plan. Soffit-style lighting above building entrances and under the eaves along the north and south side of the building shall be permitted. Parking lot lighting and soffit-style building lighting may be turned on from one hour before to one hour after evening services, but shall be turned off no event later than 9:00 PM and shall not be used on evenings when no services are held. Walkway lighting using bollards, not to exceed four feet in height, may be used in the vicinity of the main entrance on the south side of the building and may be illuminated during all hours of darkness. 1111 5. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permit, the applicant shall obtain approval for construction drawings and shall comply with all requirements of Title 1000: Building and Development Regulations. The construction drawings shall show no more than a 98- seat capacity in the church. 6. Approval of this site layout is dependent on sprinklering of the building, because the access drive along the north side of the building is insufficient for emergency access purposes. The applicant shall obtain approval for a plan for sprinldering the building from the Fire Department prior to the issuance of any grading or building permit. Sprinklers shall be installed and pass inspection by the Fire Department prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the building. 7. The height of the steeple shall be limited to nine feet above the ridgeline of the roof. 8. Prior to any grading or demolition work on the site, the applicant shall install construction fencing at or beyond the dripline of any existing trees to be preserved according to the landscaping plans approved with this conditional use permit. Adjustment of fencing locations may be approved by the Director of Community Development, after consultation with the City Forester, based on practical necessity. No construction equipment or activity shall be permitted within these fenced areas. The applicant shall act upon the advice of the City Forester and shall exercise diligence • 4 City Council Resolution No. 5008 • October 29, 1996 Page 7 during the construction process to prevent disturbance of root systems and changes in ground elevations which would cause these existing trees to die. 9. Prior to any grading or demolition work on the site, silt fencing shall be put in place as shown on the grading and erosion control plan and shall be maintained throughout construction. 10. Prior to issuance of any occupancy permit, the applicant shall trim the existing trees proposed to remain in the sight triangle at the intersection of Pleasant View Drive and County Road H, if needed, to assure no sight distance problem is caused. 11. Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits, the property owner shall enter into a development contract as required by Chapter 1006 of the Mounds View Municipal Code. 12. The property owner shall remain in compliance with the requirements and contingencies contained in the conditional use permit governing this site as stated in City Council Resolution No. 5007. 111 13. Approval of this conditional use permit shall include the following: • Boundary Survey prepared by Pioneer Engineering, printed 10/7/96 • Grading and.Erosion Control Plan prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated 9/26/96 • Landscaping Plan prepared by Rio Architects, dated 9/30/96 and revised in accordance with #2.a. and #2.b. above • Floorplans and Elevations prepared by LRK design group, received 10/7/96, and revised in accordance with #2.d. and #2.e. above. • Detail Sheet to be prepared in accordance with #2.c. above. Adopted this 29th day of October, 1996 Jerome Linke, Mayor ATTEST: Charles Whiting, City Clerk-Administrator (SEAL) 0B:\DRRESO.APP i CM OF CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW Agenda Section REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION Report Number: DMASTAFF REPORT Report Date: 10/24/96 isP =ECOUNCIL MEETING DATE Special Order of Bus. •A~°8r"n-Partnecst°QS October 29, 1996 Consent Agenda Public Hearings X Council Business Item Description: Consideration of the Adoption of Ordinance No. 96-591 Relating to Licensing,Amending Title 500, Chapters 502 and 503, Sections 502.03,502.06,502.07,503.03,503.06 and 503.07 by Adding New • Subdivisions to the Mounds View Municipal Code. Executive Director's Review/Recommendation: -No Comments to supplement this report -Comments attached. Explanation/Summary(attach supplement sheets as necessary) Summary: Ordinance No. 96-591 was tabled at the October 14 regular Council meeting. The Council requested that the ordinance for the sale of temporary on-sale intoxicating and nonintoxicating malt liquor be limited to only two City owned properties - Bel-Rae and Golf Course. This eliminates the need to come to Council for possible requests for liquor at City Parks and other City owned properties. eendments to the ordinance relating to this limitation can be found in the following sections: tion 502.03, Subd. 6, line 6 Section 502.03, Subd. 7, lines 7,10,14 Section 502.07, Subd. le, lines 1, 5 Section 503.03, Subd. 3, line 4 Section 503.07, Subd. lc., lines 1,5 In addition per Council's direction, the insurance requirements were amended in Sections 502.07, Subd. le. and 503.07, Subd. lc. City Attorney Bob Long will be in attendance if the Council has further questions. Cth14- Economic Dtv lopment Coordinator OCOMMENDATION: Waive the reading and Adopt Ordinance No. 96-591 Relating to Licensing, Amending Chapters 502 and 503, and Adding New Subdivisions to the Municipal Code. ORDINANCE NO. 96-591 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO LICENSING,AMENDING TITLE 500, CHAPTERS 502 AND 503, SECTIONS 502.03, 502.06, 502.07, 503.03,503.06 AND 503.07 BY ADDING NEW SUBDIVISIONS TO THE MOUNDS VIEW MUNICIPAL CODE THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW ORDAINS: Section 1. Section 502.03 of the Mounds View Municipal Code is amended by adding new subdivisions to read: Subd. 6. Temporary Intoxicating Liquor Special Event. A temporary special event intoxicating liquor license may be issued to a club, or charitable, religious or other nonprofit organization which has been in existence for at least three (3) years. The license may authorize the sale of intoxicating liquor on-sale for not more than three (3) consecutive days and may authorize the sale of intoxicating liquor on City owned premises located at 5394 Edgewood Drive and 8290 Coral Sea Street in addition to premises the licensee owns or permanently occupies. The license may provide that the licensee may contract for intoxicating liquor • catering services with the holder of an on-sale intoxicating liquor license issued by the City or any adjacent municipality or the holder of a caterers permit issued by the commissioner of public safety. Licenses under this subdivision are not valid unless first approved by the commissioner of public safety or unless the licensee contracts for intoxicating liquor catering services with the holder of a State caterers permit issued by the commissioner of public safety. This license shall be required notwithstanding the requirement of any permit by the state. Subd. 7. Temporary Intoxicating Liquor Banquet. In addition to any permit which may be required by the state. an intoxicating liquor banquet license may be issued only to the holder of an on-sale intoxicating liquor license issued under subdivision 1 of this chapter or to the holder of an on-sale intoxicating liquor license issued by an adjacent city. Such license will permit the licensee to dispense intoxicating liquor at any convention. banquet. conference. meeting or social event conducted on the premises located at 5394 Edgewood Drive and 8290 Coral Sea Street owned by the City of Mounds View. The licensee must be engaged to dispense intoxicating liquor at any event held by a person or organization permitted to use the City owned premises located at 5394 Edgewood Drive and 8290 Coral Sea Street and may dispense intoxicating liquor only to persons attending the event. The licensee may not dispense or sell intoxicating liquor to any person attending or participating in an amateur athletic event held on • the City owned premises located at 5394 Edgewood Drive and 8290 Coral Sea Street. i 40Sec. 2 Section 502.06, subd. 2 of Mounds View Municipal Code is amended by adding a new paragraph to read: Subd. 2 Fees: c. The fees required for the temporary licenses described in Section 502.03, Subdivisions 6 and 7 shall be established by resolution of the City Council and shall be paid prior to the effective date of the license. Sec. 3. Section 502.07 of the Mounds View Municipal Code is amended by adding a new Subdivision le. to read: e. Temporary License for Event on City owned premises located at 5394 Edgewood Drive or 8290 Coral Sea Street: As a result of the sale or dispensing of non-intoxicating malt liquor or intoxicating liquor under a temporary license issued under Section 502.03. Subdivisions 6 and 7 for events on City owned premises located at 5394 Edgewood Drive and 8290 Coral Sea Street the following insurance limits are required: $100,000 Bodily Injury Each Person. $200.000 Each Common Cause: $100,000 Property Damage Each Common Cause; $100,000 Loss of Means of Support, $200,000 Each Common Cause: and $300,000 Annual Aggregate. • On any policy or insurance pool providing coverage hereunder, the City, shall be named as an additional insured. The license holder under this paragraph shall hold the City harmless and agree to indemnify the City for acts of the license holder. Sec. 4. Section 503.03 of the Mounds View Municipal Code is amended by adding a new subdivision 3 to read: Subd. 3 Temporary Non-Intoxicating Liquor Special Events License. A temporary special event non-intoxicating liquor license may be issued for the retail sale of non-intoxicating malt liquor for consumption on City owned premises located at•5394 Edgewood Drive and 8290 Coral Sea Street and during the time of the special event. A special event license may be issued to a club, or charitable, religious or other non-profit organization which has been in existence for at lease three (3)years. or to an organization contributing all of the profits of the sale of non-intoxicating malt liquor to a charity. or to any business holding an on-sale license to sell non-intoxicating malt liquor issued by the City or by an adjacent city. The license shall specify the date. time and place and premises of the special event. A special event non-intoxicating license is not transferable. Sec. 5. Section 503.06, Subd. 3. of the Mounds View Municipal Code is amended by • adding a new subparagraph d. to read: d. The fee for a Temporary Non-Intoxicating Special Events License shall be established by resolution of the City Council. 411 Sec. 6. Section 503.07 of the Mounds View Municipal Code is amended by adding a new Subdivision lc. to read: c. Temporary License for Event on City owned premises located at 5394 Edgewood Drive and 8290 Coral Sea Street. As a result of the sale or dispensing of non-intoxicating malt liquor or intoxicating liquor under a temporary license issued under Section 503.03, Subdivision 3 for events on City owned property located at 5394 Edgewood Drive and 8290 Coral Sea Street the following insurance limits are required: $100,000 Bodily Injury Each Person. $200.000 Each Common Cause: $100.000 Property Damage Each Common Cause; $100,000 Loss of Means of Support, $200,000 Each Common Cause: and $300,000 Annual Aggregate. On any policy or pool providing coverage hereunder, the City shall be named as an additional insured. The license holder under this paragraph shall hold the City harmless and agree to indemnify the City for acts of the license holder. Sec. 7. This ordinance is effective thirty days after its publication. Read by the City Council of the City of Mounds View this day of 1996. Read and passed by the City Council of the City of Mounds View this day of , 1996. Mayor ATTEST: Clerk-Administrator Approved as to form: City Attorney • 0CRY OF THIS IS IT 41770UNDS1. M P°dies:-PartneWAs OCTOBER 21 - OCTOBER 25, 1996 ADMINISTRATION pursue funding sources applicable to those components. A budget and selection of a I want to thank the Council and city employees for consultant to facilitate this work will be considered the flowers and thoughtful card delivered to my in November. The City will likely have to grandmother's funeral. Having been on the contribute something less than $5,000 to be a part delivering side many times, it is hard to fully say how of the effort. I will report back in November. appreciative it is to be thought of in these situations. Thanks again. Last week I attended a meeting at TCAAP and reviewed the water treatment facility in New I want to update everyone on a few ongoing items. Brighton used to treat the pollution plume created First, the Quad Rink project is moving along with at the arsenal site. Interesting tour. That's it for the standard bugs still to be worked out. It appears now. Remember the Council meeting is Tuesday that the MASC is considering committing evening. For those interested, the Airport Task themselves to upwards of 1000 hours of ice time Force will be meeting Monday at 5:30 p.m. for the fourth rink. This raises questions about the conditions the other communities agreed to for the Chuck other three rinks. The concern is that MASC is responsible for filling "shoulder" season hours Less then two weeks before the election! The working with the other three communities on their election judges are all geared up for the big day. rink commitment. With their additional hours of With about 900 absentee ballots coming in, and commitment on the fourth rink, there is some City Hall being open on Saturday and Monday for concern that those new hours will in actuality be in in-person absentee voting, many judges will be competition with the shoulder season hours. The working extra hours before November 5. People issue should be resolved in the master agreement have been very accommodating with their however, by differentiating the hours and MASC's schedules- that really helps me. commitment. In other words, I doubt it will be an impediment to finalizing an agreement. I was The Airport Task Force will be meeting with MAC briefed on all this on Wednesday morning with the representative Roy Ferman on Monday, October other communities and MASC officials. 2 I, at 5:30. The group is once again coming together to discuss the noise abatement plan. For The Council may recall the City, as part of the 1- all of you Internet surfers, MAC has a home page 35W Corridor group submitted a planning grant to on the Internet that can be accessed for information the Met Council focusing on housing and economic regarding a variety of noise, operational and general development along the north I-35W corridor. The airport issues (mostly dealing with MSP). The application did not get approved. The Mayor's website is: http\\:www.macaysat.org. committee of the group met and agreed to break down the components of the grant application and Dawn 2 THIS IS IT OCTOBER 21-OCTOBER 25,1996 Thursday, October 10, 1996 I attended a TUG fair market value of the land can be determined. meeting which focused on Customer Service. The There has been disagreement from the beginning presenter, Sally Chial the HR Director from on this number, therefore, to legally substantiate Roseville, discussed how local governments can costs we should have a document to protect both meet or exceed customer expectations. Everest and City regarding this matter. Also, Everest is willing to use $I.48 per square foot The SCORE grant information has been send to (same as the C.G. Hill Project)as a fair market value Ramsey County. The City should be notified the to pay park dedication fees but shows a market amount of the grant later part of November. value of$4 per square foot for reimbursement in the TIF Agreement. We need to be consistent with Lynnette this number and an independent appraisal will clarify the issue. We are still planning on bringing a more ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT complete draft to the EDA at the November work session We have received 6 Proposals for the Study of Section 9 on Highway 10. The EDC will be VB Digs accountant spoke to Bob Thistle of interviewing all 6 Companies. The interviews are Springstead regarding information needed to scheduled for this Thursday 10-24 beginning at 7:30 substantiate financial worth of the organization. am and Tuesday 10-29 beginning at 7:30 am. The Again, we are waiting patiently for the information. following companies submitted proposals: BRW, Inc.; Dahlgren, Shardlow, and Uban, Inc.; State of I have been asked to be a judge for the National Minnesota, Department of Administration; Town City Communication Awards for Community Planning Collaborative; SRF Consulting and Sanders Newsletters. I will be reviewing the entries next Wacker Wehrman Bergly, Inc. Recommendations week and sharing the ideas with Sharie for our for hiring a consulting group will come to the EDA newsletter. There were no entries from Minnesota at the work session in November. this year. I spoke to Ben Chanco from Pioneer Press Cathy regarding his absence at the Public Information Meeting. Apparently, they are swamped due to the election articles but he does want to come by and FINANCE discuss the information with Chuck and I later this Mary& Kitty are continuing to receive training on week or next and do a story on the project. I have the new accounting software and work on the been unsuccessful in contacting Greg Schmidt but conversion to the new system. Dorothy's husband will be suggesting that he come and review the has been in and out of the hospital for the last tape. Also, Nick Temali requested a tape of the several weeks; he is home again but needs to watch meeting. his diet and exercise daily; we all hope he continues his recovery. Jim O'Meara has completed the first draft of a Development Assistance Agreement for the I have been analyzing TIF activity to assist in development of Building N. Everest is reviewing projecting future available increment. Based upon a the draft and we are waiting for concrete numbers comparison of prior TIF reporting to the accounting from them on the site costs and public records, there was a discrepancy. In addition, some improvements. Also, Mr. O'Meara is requesting expenditures did not appear to be properly that a third party appraisal be completed so that a categorized. As such, I have been reviewing TIF 3 THIS IS IT OCTOBER 21-OCTOBER 25, 1996 activity from inception and will be meeting with PARKS, RECREATION & Cathy to categorize expenditures. I will then filing corrected TIF reports with the State and prepare FORESTRY projections for the various TIF Districts. PARKS: The crew continues to winterize the parks - Work also continues on the budget and preparing blowing out the irrigation systems, drinking fountains information for the upcoming budget presentation. and shelter plumbing. This is the last week for tennis and volleyball nets -they will all be collected Bruce and stored for the winter. Portable restrooms will also be picked up sometime next week. The plan is COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT to have everything buttoned up before Halloween The owner of Townsedge Terrace, Gerald night. Toberman, has filed bankruptcy. Several residents of the mobile home park have called concerned The fencing project is underway the crew about the future of the park and asking about the continues to work on removing the posts and possibility of a Closing Ordinance. Two years ago, concrete apron. Once removed the new posts will we had drafted a Mobile Home Park Closing be installed. Ordinance based on the Bloomington ordinance. When Jim Thomson, City Attorney, reviewed the RECREATION: ordinance and discovered that the City of The November/December Newsletter has been Bloomington was being sued as a result of their completed - currently at the printer. Delivery will ordinance. He recommended that we put our occur this weekend. Thanks to Sharie for another ordinance on hold until the lawsuit had been successful preparation. The Halloween Hullabaloo resolved. We have been notified that recently, the will be held this coming Saturday at the Bel Rae. Bloomington ordinance was upheld by the The count is high, with expectations of Minnesota State Supreme Court. This will be an approximately 250 children attending. item for consideration by the Council upon Pam's return from vacation. I am attending the National Recreation & Parks Association Congress in Kansas City, Missouri this A special Planning Commission meeting was held week-Tuesday through Sunday. on Wednesday to discuss the telecommunication towers and antennas. Staff invited the two industry CABLE TV: representatives, SBA and US West Air Touch Patrick will be in the office Tuesday and Thursday in Cellular, to explain the technology and the need for addition to off site taping. There are many work requests for Pat plus upcoming election coverage. the tower height. This technology will provide consumers with better clarity for the cellular phone use. Mary Pam returns from her vacation on Monday, PUBLIC WORKS October 28, and we look forward to her return. The Streets Department started sweeping the We hope she had a wonderful stay in sunny roads. They have also been pot hole patching and California. doing road ratings for our Pavement Management program. Jennifer 4 THIS IS IT OCTOBER 21-OCTOBER 25, 1996 The Water Department continues to pump Tim Brennan gave a presentation to a parent's hydrants and repair Meters/MIU's that aren't group at Edgewood Jr. High. The Chief also met functioning properly. We had a fire alarm at the with Principal Penny Howard to discuss various Treatment Plant on Bronson Drive, October 23. issues. The furnace was turned on there in the morning and dust was on the registers and because the The COPS task force met last week . Four residents system is very sensitive, we had 2 alarms. They were in attendance. The upcoming Halloween also had numerous water shutoffs last week. Party and other community issues were discussed. The Sewer Department continues to televise and Dave Brick attended an all day "Community clean sewer. Last week, they assisted the City of Network Conference". The focus was on child Circle Pines in cleaning, with the vactor, an aerator abuse. line to one of their lakes. Tim The business park lights, on Program Avenue, are out again. Bacon's Electric was called to repair. (Gophers chewing on the cables again.) The public hearing notice for the Bronson Drive Reconstruction project, was published in the Bulletin, October 23. Individual assessment amounts and the public hearing notifications are being prepared. These notices will mailed by October 28. Mike has been meeting with the companies that want to install antennas on the water tower and NSP. The plans for the reconstruction of Old Highway 8 have been received. SEH has received a copy for reviewal and our Water and Sewer Departments, along with Mike, are also reviewing the plans. Staff is sending out 8 - I 0 mailings to properties that have not had their meter changed out. The letters state the owners are in violation of City Code and explains the actions the City will take should the owners not respond to the certified letters. Tracy POLICE A number of officers attended "use of force"training this week at Century college. MEMO To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Chuck Whiting, City Administrator Re: Two Business Items First, Council members have received worksheets to be filled out for the City Administrator's review. When you have completed them, send them directly to Jim Brimeyer's office. He will want to receive them by the first weekend in November. He is then scheduled to meet with me on November 12 at 4:30, the Council at 5:30 and all together shortly thereafter, all this prior to our regular November 12 meeting. Second, our next work session is scheduled November 4, the night before the election. Since the Council will have to again meet on November 6 to canvas the election results, perhaps the Council would want to move its work session to the November 6 date. I will bring this up under my report on Tuesday evening.