The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPL PACKET 09202005 Meeting Sheet IIIIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII IIII IIII 104948 Box: 33 Folder: PL PACKETS 2005-2011 Document: PL PACKET 09202005 CITY OF ST. ANTHONY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA SEPTEMBER 20,f 2005 7:00 P.M. REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS I. CALL TO ORDER. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. III. ROLL CALL. IV. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA. V. MEETING MINUTES. V.1 Review and Approve Planning Commission Minutes of August 16, 2005 VI. COMMUNICATION WITH CITY COUNCIL. VI.1 Designate a Planning Commission Representative to the September 27, 2005 City Council Meeting VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS. VII.1. Conditional- Use Permit— 49's Catering Services VII.2. Conditional Use Permit — Snyder's Drug, St. Anthony Market Place VII.3. REZONING PETITION FOR R-2 —•3645 Chelmsford Road VII.4. Zoning Ordinance Amendment — Egress Window Well VII.5. Zoning Ordinance Amendment — Vehicle Sales Prohibited VII.6. Administrative Subdivision of Property — LaNel Properties VIII. Concept Reviews. VIII.1. Redevelopment of the Kenzie Terrace/Lowry Avenue Commercial Property IX. PUBLIC INPUT. Individuals may address the Planning Commission about any item not included on the Regular Meeting Agenda. Speakers are requested to come to the podium, state their name and address for the City Clerks record and limit their remarks to five (5) minutes HAPlanningTC Agendas\2005\092005 pc agenda.doc i X. INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION. a. Police Chief Named XI. ANNOUNCEMENTS. XII. ADJOURNMENT. H:\Planning\PC Agendas\2005\092005 pc agenda.doc Planning Commission Meeting Minutes August 16, 2005 Page 1 1 CITY OF ST. ANTHONY 2 3 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 4 5 August 16, 2005 6 7:00 p.m. 7 8 9 I. CALL TO ORDER. 10 Chair Stromgren called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 11 12 II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. 13 Chair Stromgren invited the Commission and the audience to join in the Pledge of Allegiance. 14 15 III. ROLL CALL. 16 Commissioners present: Chair Stromgren; Vice Chair Hanson; Commissioners Hoska, 17 Jensen, Jenson and Young. 18 19 Absent: Commissioners Galyon. 20 21 Also present: Assistant City Manager Kim Moore-Sykes. 22 23 IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 24 25 Ms. Moore-Sykes added the following to the agenda: Section VIII, Concept Review, Item 8.3, 26 Snyder's Drug Store—Conditional Use Permit for a Drive-Through Window. 27 28 Motion by Commissioner Young, second by Commissioner Hoska, to approve the meeting 29 agenda as amended. 30 31 Motion carried unanimously 32 33 V. MEETING MINUTES. 34 5.1 Review and Approve Planning Commission Minutes of August 16 2005. 35 36 Commissioner Jensen had the following correction: 37 • Page 6, Paragraph 3, Line 23, reads: Ben Charles; should read: Ben Shardlow 38 • Page 6, Paragraph 4, Line 37, reads: Mr. Charles; should read: Mr. Shardlow 39 • Page 6, Paragraph 5, Line 42, reads: Mr. Charles; should read: Mr. Shardlow 40 • Page 7, Paragraph 1, Line 3, reads: Mr. Charles; should read: Mr. Shardlow 41 • Page 7, Paragraph 2, Line 10, reads: Mr. Charles; should read: Mr. Shardlow 42 • Page 7, Paragraph 3, Line 14, reads: Mr. Charles; should read: Mr. Shardlow 43 44 Chair Stromgren had the following corrections: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes August 16, 2005 Page 2 1 • Page 11, Paragraph 6, Line 34, reads: `they go back to know benchmarks'; should read: 2 `they go back to known benchmarks' 3 • Page 12, Paragraph 4, Line 13, reads: `from the structure to the pin'; should read: `from the 4 structure to the property line' 5 6 Motion by Vice Chair Hanson, second by Commissioner Jensen, to approve the meeting minutes 7 of the Planning Commission of August 16, 2005 as amended. 8 9 Motion carried unanimously 10 11 VI. COMMUNICATION WITH CITY COUNCIL 12 6.1 Designate a Planning Commission member to the August 23 2005 City Council Meeting_ 13 14 Chair Stromgren stated that he would discuss a representative with Ms. Moore-Sykes after the 15 meeting. 16 17 VII. PUBLIC HEARING. 18 19 7.1 AMCON—St. Anthony Marketplace—CUP and Variances 20 21 Chair Stromgren opened the public hearing at 7:05 p.m. 22 23 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that the City has received a revised request by Paul Tucci, OPPIDAN, 24 for three public hearings for the outlot on the corner of Kenzie Terrace and Highway 88. She 25 stated that Mr. Tucci has submitted applications for a Conditional Use Permit for the restaurant 26 to be within 250-feet of a residential area; a Variance request for the building setback/outlot; and 27 a Variance request for the on-site parking. She stated that at the May 17, 2005 Planning 28 Commission meeting Mr. Tucci presented several requests for consideration in order to finish 29 their project associated with the St. Anthony Marketplace project. She stated that in 2003 their 30 proposal was to build a 6,000-square foot building that would house a popular sports bar and 31 grill. She stated that when the sports bar and grill owners decided not to put a store in St. 32 Anthony, the developers put together another plan that reduced the size of the building to 4,500- 33 square feet and would include a coffee shop with a drive-through and space for two other retail 34 shops. She stated that the proposal was presented to the Planning Commission at the May 2004 35 meeting noting that the Commission's recommendation on this proposal was passed to the City 36 Council for their approval. She stated that at the City Council meeting on May 24, 2004 the 37 Council voted to deny all of the requests for the proposed project and the developers of the 38 project have again revised their proposal and have a plan for a 4,500 square foot restaurant, 39 similar to the original proposal, but smaller. 40 41 Ms. Moore-Sykes explained that AMCON is required to secure a Conditional Use Permit for the 42 proposed restaurant that is planned to be located in the outlot at 2900 Kenzie Terrace. She stated 43 that the City Ordinance, Chapter 16, Section 1635.03 (p) requires a CUP for a restaurant located 44 250-feet from a residential area. She stated that a resolution approved by the City Council in July 45 2003 granted AMCON a Conditional Use Permit for the proposed restaurant being closer than Planning Commission Meeting Minutes August 16, 2005 Page 3 1 250-feet of a residential zoning district adding that since that restaurant was never constructed 2 the originally approved CUP expired. She reviewed the conditions approved for this site in 2003 3 with the Commission. 4 5 Ms. Moore-Sykes referenced the Variance petition for the building setback-outlot stating that in 6 revising the original site plan due to changes in proposed uses and the locations of those uses, 7 AMCON has presented a site plan that proposes a 4,500 square foot building, which represents a 8 reduction in size of the building footprint by 1.500 square feet. She stated that the revised site 9 plan also reduces the number of variances required for the construction of the building planned 10 for the Outlot. She noted that Section 1635.05, Subdivision 4 of the City Ordinance states that 11 the front yard of a commercial building should be at least 35-feet or a distance equal to the 12 average of the front yard depths on the two adjacent lots. She stated that since this site is on a 13 corner lot, the 35-foot front yard requirement was used. She stated that as the revised site plan 14 shows, the northwest corner is five feet from the property line and the northeast corner is 12-feet 15 from the property line. She stated that as Mr. Tucci noted in his letter dated July 6, 2005, that 16 with the reduction of the size of the proposed restaurant, the new proposed plan encroaches less 17 into the setback than the original site plan that received a setback variance in 2003. She 18 explained that the current site plan requires a variance of 30-feet for the northwest corner and a 19 variance of 23-feet for the northeast corner and previously Council had approved a variance of 20 30-feet for each corner. She stated that Resolution 03-053, approved on July 15, 2003, identified 21 the Finding of Facts based on hardships that exist for this property in support of granting the 22 setback variance and she reviewed with the Commission. She stated that since no construction 23 occurred within the year of their approval, the variance expired and the applicant is now 24 requesting a similar setback variance to the northwest corner of the proposed building, as it does 25 extend into the building setback 12-feet and coming within 5-feet of the property line. 26 27 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that the last variance is in regards to parking on the site. She stated that 28 previously, AMCON had received approval for a parking variance for their project in 2003. She 29 noted that there is some discrepancy as to the number of parking spaces that were covered by the 30 variance but Resolution 03-053 referenced a variance of 27 spaces. She indicated that Mr. Tucci 31 suggests that the original proposal needed a variance closer to 50 parking spaces and according to 32 the revised proposed site plan for this property, and as the result of the reduction of the building 33 square footage, AMCON has significantly reduced the number of parking spaces that they need 34 to address with a variance. She noted that Section 1650.05, Subdivision 1, states that 35 Commercial properties are required to have one space for each 300 square feet of gross floor area 36 and Mr. Tucci states in his letter that the 18,500 square feet of retail space, a reduction of 2,000 37 square feet from the original plan, requires 62 parking stalls. She stated that Section 1650.05, 38 Subdivision 1, requires that restaurants have parking spaces equal to the total seating capacity 39 divided by 2.5, plus one space for each employee on the largest shift. She explained that the total 40 parking spaces needed for this site is 149 parking spaces and the parking spaces provided by 41 AMCON's site plan is 118, for a deficit of 31 parking spaces. She indicated that they did receive 42 an email from Dennis Cavanaugh in support of the revised plan. 43 44 Paul Tucci, OPPIDAN, stated that they worked to incorporate the comments from the Council 45 with respect to the size of the restaurant noting that they were able to convince the operator to go Planning Commission Meeting Minutes August 16, 2005 Page 4 1 out to the pad site and make it bigger. He stated that they are aware of the requirements that at 2 least 50-percent of the sales must be food and they are prepared to adhere to these requirements. 3 He stated that they should be able to work with the recommendations for the boulevard 4 landscaping and have shared the recommendations with the applicant. 5 6 Commissioner Jensen referenced the condition included in the Staff summary talks about the 7 hours for outdoor seating are not to exceed 10:00 p.m. and asked if this is a serving issue that 8 previous Council's or Planning Commission's had or is this a concern of the operator. He asked 9 if the intent of the condition is to bring people into the restaurant after 10:00 p.m. 10 11 Chair Stromgren clarified that the reason for the condition was due to the concerns with outdoor 12 noise after 10:00 p.m. due to the adjacent residential areas. 13 14 Mr. Tucci indicated that the condition was similar to the original adding that they would have 15 preferred a later timeframe but they understand the concerns expressed by the residents and they 16 do not have an issue with the timeframe. 17 18 Commissioner Jensen stated that in the past there was discussion about creating trail linkages 19 with the walkways noting that the connections are not shown on the site plan. He asked that they 20 include the connections to the sidewalk, the parkway and bus stop area. Mr. Tucci stated that 21 they could include the connections that extend out to the west along the parkway area and 22 reviewed the connections with the Commission. 23 24 Commissioner Jensen clarified that he would like to see connections to the walkway around the 25 perimeter from both the east and west areas. Mr. Tucci stated that they would work with the City 26 Engineer on the details. 27 28 Chair Stromgren closed the public hearing at 7:19 p.m. 29 30 Motion by Commissioner Jensen, second by Commissioner Hoska, to recommend approval 31 Resolution 03-052, a Resolution relating to Conditional Use Permit requests for the proposed 32 redevelopment of the corner of Kenzie Terrace and Highway 88 for a Restaurant located within 33 250-feet from a residential district and to include conditions A through I, as referenced in the 34 Staff Report. 35 36 Motion carried unanimously 37 38 Chair Stromgren stated that the next motion is to consider recommending approval for the 39 reduction in the setback from the 35-foot front yard to 12-feet, bearing in mind that this is a 40 comer condition, not a entire side or elevation of the building. 41 42 Commissioner Jensen stated that Item A in the Staff Report is a hold over and recommended that 43 Item A be struck as it is no longer relevant. He stated that Item Dhas a co-mingled discussion 44 about blighted buildings and without that today, it is not blighted. He stated that they could still 45 make a finding for the variance regardless of the discussion around blighted buildings. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes August 16, 2005 Page 5 1 2 Commissioner Young stated that the corner is still blighted, particularly on the outlot site noting 3 that they are not talking about a building, they are talking about an empty corner. 4 5 Ms. Moore-Sykes agreed noting that she has received several calls from residents asking when 6 the City would be taking care of the blighted corner. She stated that the residents have 7 recognized it as a blighted site. 8 9 Motion by Commissioner Hoska, second by Commissioner Jensen, to recommend approval of 10 Resolution 03-053, a Resolution relating to Variance requests for the proposed redevelopment of 11 the corner of Kenzie Terrace and Highway 88 allowing a variance for the building setback outlot 12 as outlined in Part B of the Staff Report, with the reduction of the restaurant to be 4500-square 13 feet and noting that Items A through G remain standing, as is. Chair Stromgren amended to state 14 that Item D to be changed from existing blighted buildings to pre-existing blighted buildings. 15 Commissioner Jensen amended that the variance requirement should be changed 35 feet to 5 feet 16 on the north line and 35 feet to 12 feet on the west line. 17 18 Motion carried unanimously 19 20 Motion by Commissioner Jensen, second by Commissioner Young, to recommend approval of 21 Resolution 03-053, a Resolution relating to variance requests for the proposed redevelopment of 22 the corner of Kenzie Terrace and Highway 88 relating to the Variance Request for Parking On 23 Site with 31 stalls and to provide sufficient parking based on the site plan; to include the 24 following three conditions to the variance be met: pre-existing shape of the site; not solely 25 economic; and that the circumstances were not caused by the applicant. 26 27 Motion carried unanimously 28 29 7.2 City Code Text Change and Conditional Use Permit Request—2829 Anthony Lane South 30 31 Chair Stromgren opened the public hearing'at 7:27 p.m. 32 33 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that Eric Reiners, architect with Welman Sperides Architects and 34 representative for the International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 49, has requested a 35 public hearing for their proposal to amend the City's Zoning Code to include catering activities 36 as a permitted conditional use in the Industrial Zoning District. She stated that the applicant 37 recently opened their newly constructed catering kitchen and is now interested in opening the 38 facilities to the public. She stated that originally Staff understood that this new facility was to be 39 used for private, in-house use. She stated that in reviewing the City's Zoning Ordinance, there is 40 no allowance given for this use either as a permitted use or a permitted conditional use. She 41 referenced Section 1635.03, Subdivision's c and p and explained that the Commercial Zoning 42 District does allow activities similar to catering or as a facility that would support catering as a 43 permitted conditional use. She stated that concerns regarding traffic and parking associated with 44 this proposal created a need to discuss this request at a Concept Review, which was held on July 45 19, 2005. She stated that this would not increase parking needs significantly noting that the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes August 16, 2005 Page 6 1 applicant has indicated that the catering facilities would be used mainly on the weekends. She 2 stated that as proposed, the changes to the text would in the uses as permitted in an L1 District 3 only by a conditional use permit issued by City Council and reviewed the conditions with the 4 Commission. 5 6 Eric Reiners, Architect with Welman Sperides Architects and representative for the International 7 Union of Operating Engineers, Local 49, stated that the proposal is basically unchanged from the 8 Concept Review. He reviewed the recent addition and renovations with the Commission noting 9 that Local 49 has been a good neighbor in the City of St. Anthony for a long time. He stated that 10 when the 49er's remodeled the area it was done primarily for their use during their monthly and 11 annual membership meetings. He explained that they had a small service area at the north end of 12 the meeting hall where they served refreshments and snacks and when it was remodeled it was 13 done with the intent to provide catering services. He stated that Prom Catering would be the 14 contractor and has expressed interest in opening their services to the public. He assured the 15 Commission that the facilities would be used mainly on weekends for outside groups for events 16 such as weddings and family reunions. 17 18 Chair Stromgren closed the public hearing at 7:32 p.m. 19 20 Motion by Vice Chair Hanson, second by Commissioner Hoska, to recommend approval of the 21 City Code Text Change and Conditional Use Permit Request for 2829 Anthony Lane South, 22 following uses are allowable in Industrial District, Letter H, I. 23 24 Motion carried unanimously 25 26 7.3 2_909—30th Avenue NE—Variance to Allow Egress Windows in Side Yard Setbacks 27 28 Chair Stromgren opened the public hearing at 7:35 p.m. 29 30 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that the property owners of 2909-30th Avenue NE, Marcus and Ramona 31 Steadman, are petitioning for a 3-foot variance to the Zoning Code to be allowed to install an 32 egress window in the 5-foot side yard setback on the west side of their property. She stated that 33 by omission from the Zoning code, egress windows are not a permitted use or allowed as an 34 encroachment into the side yard setback of the R-1 Zoning District. She referenced section 35 1600.03, Uses Not Specified, noting that it states that if a use is not specifically permitted, 36 permitted by conditional use permit or prohibited, the use will be considered prohibited; and 37 Section 1650.03, Encroachment in Yards, does not include egress windows as an allowed 38 encroachment. She indicated that the property owners have reported that the west side yard of 39 their property is the only feasible place for the installation of an egress window, as the east side 40 of their house has a driveway and the room that requires the egress window is at the west end of 41 the house. She stated that the applicants did consider locating the egress window in the front of 42 the house at the suggestion of Staff, but upon investigation discovered that the gas main enters 43 the structure through the front of the house. She stated that the front of the house also has a stone 44 fagade that the owners have reported as original and would be difficult to replace or repair. 45 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes August 16, 2005 Page 7 1 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that Ms. Steadman came before the Planning Commission on July 19, 2 2005 to discuss the plan for the installation and the Planning Commission informed Ms. 3 Steadman that the current Zoning Ordinance does not allow egr4ess windows in the side yard 4 setback. She stated that the Chair had indicated that the Commission was reviewing various 5 ordinances for possible revision and that they could look at amending the text to allow for an 6 egress window in the setback. She stated that Ms. Steadman was informed about the variance 7 process and the requirements if she wanted pursue the installation noting that Ms. Steadman 8 indicated that she is concerned with safety issues for the family if they want to use the lower 9 level of the house. 10 11 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that based on information provided by the Building Inspector a 3-foot 12 variance is required because the minimum dimensions required of an egress window well that 13 would provide access to the outside in the case of emergency is 9 square feet. 14 15 Marc Steadman, 2909-30`"Avenue NE, stated that they are asking that the City consider granting 16 them a variance to install an egress window in the lower level of their home. He provided the 17 Commission with an overview of the dimensions and provided them with examples of the house 18 showing where the window would be installed. He explained that one of their concerns is that 19 when they take a short walk around the neighborhood they found that there are situations where 20 window wells and egress windows have been placed into the five-foot setback area. He provided 21 the Commission with several examples of homes in the area noting that there has been precedent 22 set here. He reviewed the potential safety hazards and provided the Commission with an 23 overview of the proposed location of the egress window. He stated that they did consider 24 installing the egress window in the front of the house and found that gas main would have to be 25 relocated. He stated that they would also have to cut into the original rock base on the front 26 adding that they would prefer to install the egress window on the side of the house. He 27 acknowledged that their neighbor has expressed concerns and is not in favor of the variance. He 28 indicated that he has discussed this with his neighbor and found that his concerns are with 29 stormwater runoff, safety and aesthetic issues. He stated that he consulted with a contractor and 30 was told that the egress window would not affect the stormwater runoff. He stated that from a 31 safety perspective, he would be willing to extend it out along the property line and return it back 32 in to the house and that he would create a four-foot path for access, which would prevent any 33 potential of someone falling into the window well. He indicated that he would be willing to 34 install a screen or a six-foot privacy fence to address the aesthetic issues. 35 36 Vice Chair Hanson asked if they were doing any improvements in basement. Mr. Steadman 37 stated that the basement is finished noting that they would like to convert the den/study to a legal 38 bedroom noting the egress window would be in the correct area to allow them to have a bedroom 39 in the basement. 40 41 Vice Chair Hanson asked if the backyard area would be a possibility. Mr. Steadman explained 42 that currently there is a deck in back and placing an egress window in this area would require 43 modification to the deck. He noted that the other window in the back is on the side of the 44 driveway and is a flat window. 45 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes August 16, 2005 Page 8 1 Martin Marek, 2907 30th Avenue NE, stated that he lives adjacent to the property adding that he 2 is against the egress window. He stated that this is a safety concern for other residents noting 3 that the window would be adjacent to his driveway. He referenced verbiage in the Concept 4 Review noting that he would prefer that it state that the egress window would be `considered' not 5 `permitted'. He expressed concerns stating that when it snows there is approximately three to 6 four feet of snow that accumulates in this area due to his driveway. He noted that his garage is 7 setback from the property line and is within the five feet adding that he has lived here for over 8 twenty-three years and is concerned that the snow would block the egress window. He stated that 9 he is also concerned about the possibility of people falling into the well in addition to the 10 possibilities of carbon monoxide going in through the window during the winter when he is 11 running his car. He stated that he would not appreciate the construction encroaching on his 12 property adding that the driveway is the focal point of his property and people come around to 13 the back door. He stated that the house is too close to property line adding that the area has also 14 had some flooding in the past into the backyard, which was alleviated. 15 16 Chair Stromgren asked Mr. Marek if the idea of a fence or barrier would work. Mr. Marek stated 17 that he would not be in favor of a fence or barrier. He stated that the egress window would be 18 difficult to use if a fence is installed and expressed concerns that the area would be difficult to 19 get to in the event of a fire. 20 21 Mr. Marek expressed concerns that this would affect his driveway noting that he recently placed 22 a new driveway a garage. He explained that he has to turn around in the backyard in order to get 23 into his garage and had he known that he could have used the five feet he would have used it to 24 move his driveway and garage over further for better access. He asked the Planning Commission 25 not to recommend approval of the variance request. 26 27 Mr. Steadman acknowledged Mr. Marek's concerns regarding safety adding that they had 28 considered a protective cover for the window until the contractor explained that an egress 29 window should not be covered. He referenced Mr. Marek's concerns regarding the accumulation 30 of snow stating that it would be their responsibility to ensure that the area is clear and that they 31 window could be used properly. He stated that it is his belief that the egress window could be 32 constructed based on what the contractor has recommended. He stated that they are considering 33 installing a privacy fence along that area to address the aesthetic concerns noting that it would 34 also help to address any concerns with carbon monoxide. He stated that he does not believe that 35 carbon monoxide would be an issue, especially with a privacy fence noting that he does not 36 believe that his daughter would leave the window open during the winter. 37 38 Vice Chair Hanson asked if the windows on that side of house are currently operational. Mr. 39 Steadman stated that they are very old windows with slide latches noting that they do open but 40 with difficulty. 41 42 Fire Chief Malenick stated that egress windows are life-saving devices noting that there are also 43 building codes that address this. He stated that from a Fire Department's perspective, egress 44 windows are a must. 45 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes August 16, 2005 Page 9 1 Vice Chair Hanson referenced the dimensions of the egress window and asked if a fully clothed 2 fireperson could get through the window. Fire Chief Malenick confirmed that a Firefighter 3 would be able to get through the window noting that the main function of an egress window is to 4 get people out of the house. 5 6 Mr. Marek clarified that he is not against egress windows,just against this one. 7 8 Chair Stromgren closed the public hearing at 7:52 p.m. 9 10 Commissioner Jenson noted that the Commission would be reviewing a proposal for a text 11 amendment addressing egress windows and in reading the amendment, this would allow a 3-foot 12 variance. He reviewed the text amendment with the Commission and asked if this should be 13 considered. 14 15 Chair Stromgren stated that this request should be addressed separately from the text amendment 16 discussion. 17 18 Commissioner Hoska agreed with Fire Chief Malenick stating that egress windows are life savers 19 and it is better to have them than not, as it helps get the people out. He stated that he does not 20 see a problem with this and is in favor of granting the request. 21 22 Chair Stromgren noted that many of the stairs in these homes are not code compliant or provide 23 the required headroom and egress window helps to address these issues. He stated that in terms 24 of the other concerns mentioned by Mr. Marek they are not concerns that affect this applicant 25 noting that there is a window in the current location and carbon monoxide has not been an issue. 26 27 Vice Chair Hanson agreed noting the applicant's willingness to install a privacy fence to address 28 the aesthetic concerns. 29 30 Commissioner Hoska agreed stating that the applicant has also shown that they are willing to 31 address the snow removal issues and acknowledged that it is their responsibility to remove the 32 snow as needed. 33 34 Commissioner Jensen asked to include a friendly amendment on the structure itself to state that it 35 is off by.25 feet. 36 37 Motion by Commissioner Jensen, second by Commissioner Hoska, to recommend approval of 38 the proposed Variance to allow an egress window 3-feet from existing structure and variance 39 would be 1.53 feet from property line and subject to maintain area and allow construction of 40 privacy fence at applicants choosing for safety purposes and variance to structure to allow the 41 4.25 due to structure being built prior to building code, is done for safety purposes, undue 42 hardship is not caused by applicant but due to configuration of construction at the time; in the 43 side yard setbacks for the residence located at 2909-30th Avenue NE. 44 45 Motion carried unanimously Planning Commission Meeting Minutes August 16, 2005 Page 10 1 2 7.4 Variance to Allow Gas-Fired Grills on Balconies— Silver Lake Townhomes 3 4 Chair Stromgren opened the public hearing at 8:01 p.m. 5 6 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that the applicant is requesting a variance to the City's ordinance 7 1325.12 that does not allow open flames on balconies of multi-family structures. She stated that 8 the Silver Lake Home development is asking to be allowed this variance so that they may install 9 gas grills on the balconies of the multi-family units of the Silver Lake Homes project. She 10 explained that the gas would be plumbed to the balcony area for the gas grills and that they plan 11 to install fire suppression systems over the balcony grills. She reviewed the current City code 12 with the Commission noting that the State Fire Code does make some allowances for electric or 13 gas-fired grills provided that they are wired or plumbed to the building's electric or gas supply. 14 She stated that Commissioner Hoska had requested that she verify information about balcony 15 grills are being allowed on the new Mainstreet development in the City of New Brighton adding 16 that she has received an email from their City Planner indicating that he has not been able to 17 discuss this with their Fire Chief. She stated that he did receive a message from Mr. Lamont 18 about special powers to approve gas grills on balconies and Mr. Lamont's response stated that 19 Cities could be more restrictive than the State's requirements. She stated that he also searched 20 their Chapter 7 on buildings and their Chapter 9 of fire prevention and code and did not find 21 anything but he did promise to provide more information if necessary. 22 23 Ben Shardlow, Pratt Development, stated that he was present at last months meeting and at that 24 time several members of the Planning Commission had questions about the design, noting that he 25 reviewed several design examples with the Commission.' He stated that he reviewed the natural 26 gas line locations, the balcony layout where gas line comes in and the sprinkler head locations in 27 proximity to the gas line head with the Commission. He stated that as far as the mechanics, the 28 information provided from the sprinkler subcontractor indicates that the temperature setting 29 would be at the lowest possible level, 165-degrees. He explained that the sprinkler head has a 30 fusible link and is a dry sprinkler system, which helps to prevent the pipes from freezing. He 31 noted that the fusible link melts at 165 degrees and that if in the event of a fire the sprinkler is set 32 off, it could only be turned off by a member of the Fire Department with the use of an access key 33 or the water would have to be turned off outside the site. He stated that there is no way for the 34 property manager to be able to control the sprinkler or have access to it. He assured the 35 Commission that this design would be in line with State code noting that each balcony would 36 have a dedicated sprinkler head over the grill. He stated that there is a shared level of 37 enforcement between the property owner, the Fire Department and the City noting that the 38 property management would enforce all requirements at the condos and this specific design on 39 the balconies to ensure that the mechanism fits the State code requirements. 40 41 Chair Stromgren clarified that the sprinkler system is triggered by the fusible link with the main 42 valve inside the wall. 43 44 Commissioner Jensen clarified that the sprinkler system uses a dried medium to prevent the pipes 45 from freezing. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes August 16, 2005 Page 11 1 2 Mr. Shardlow stated that it is his understanding that the water for the interior sprinkler system 3 would be flush and that the trigger for the outdoor system is separate from the water source. He 4 confirmed that a dry medium would be used for the outdoor system over the balconies. 5 6 Commissioner Young asked what the diameter of the water sprinkler would be based on the 7 height of the balcony. Mr. Shardlow stated that he was not sure of the exact measurements 8 noting that the contractor assured them that it would cover the area. 9 10 Vice Chair Hanson asked for the dimensions of the floor and clarification of the materials they 11 would use for the flooring. Mr. Shardlow reviewed the dimensions noting that the flooring 12 would be a general construction grade wood. 13 14 Commissioner Young asked Mr. Shardlow to discuss the type of fire protection and flame 15 retardant materials they would use for wood buildings. Mr. Shardlow provided the Commission 16 with a brief overview of the materials and process noting that the sprinkler systems both within 17 the building and on the balconies would be inspected by the Fire Department to ensure that all 18 requirements and standards are met. 19 20 Commissioner Hoska asked if they have considered a main shut off valve from the gas main for 21 each floor in the event that the fire system does not work. Mr. Shardlow stated that it is his 22 understanding that this is not in place at this specific location noting that this is an idea that he 23 would like to explore with his partner. 24 25 Commissioner Jensen asked if the stoves are gas or electric. Mr. Shardlow stated that the stoves 26 would be gas. 27 28 Commissioner Hoska stated that at the last meeting a question was asked if the stoves would be 29 similar to Jenn-Aire noting that Jenn-Aire in particular, has a down draft in the stove that would 30 allow a user to actually grill on the stove and asked if this had been considered. Mr. Shardlow 31 stated that the reasonable expectation with that feature is that while you can hook up the range 32 and get the same potential process as grilling, it was their belief that the residents would not be 33 substantially pleased with having this particular function inside the home. 34 35 Commissioner Jensen stated sounded as if whatever option package would move forward and 36 would be tailored to meet requirements that would also include modifications to the flooring. 37 Ben stated building is under construction right now, would be more than happy to make the 38 modifications. Needed. 39 40 Commissioner Jensen asked if there would be any protective materials in the ceilings and walls 41 surrounding the grill. He asked if the water would be suppressed if there is a fire event due to the 42 grill. He asked if they would consider the same kind of suppression on the inside. 43 44 Mr. Shardlow stated that they are currently developing a 55-story residential building in the City 45 of Minneapolis with the same system noting that according to their fire code the residents could Planning Commission Meeting Minutes August 16, 2005 Page 12 1 have circle roofs with grills on the balcony. He stated that based on the design it is his belief that 2 it is an appropriate and responsible design for the balconies. 3 4 Fire Chief Malenick stated that suppression only helps to put out a fire and explained that a 5 sprinkler system, by design, is not a suppression system. He further explained that a sprinkler 6 system is meant to slow the fire down until the Fire Department arrives. He stated that any kind 7 of cooking appliance has a hood, which adds to the fire resistibility. 8 9 Commissioner Jensen asked if a tri-chemical system would be more applicable. Fire Chief 10 Malenick explained the differences stating that a water system would provide a continuous flow 11 of water until the fire is out, whereas a dry chemical system requires a storage tank and would 12 only flow until the chemical tank is empty. 13 14 Chair Stromgren clarified that the basic difference would then be whether the line freezes or not. 15 Fire Chief Malenick stated that as long as water is flowing it would not freeze the line. 16 17 Chair Stromgren asked for a brief overview of the local procedures for fire protection systems 18 and the inspection process. 19 20 Fire Chief Malenick explained that an annual inspection is required for all systems and reviewed 21 the procedures with the Commission. He stated that the base root of the State law is to bar all 22 grills from balconies, which is why the City adopted the ordinance. He acknowledged that there 23 are violators noting that if this is allowed and others drive by and see this, they will think that 24 they can do it too, which could become a problem. 25 26 Commissioner Jensen stated that he recently read a State article regarding safety issues with grills 27 on balconies and asked if design exists where a grill on a balcony would be ok. 28 29 Fire Chief Malenick stated that a grill would be ok if the balcony has a two-foot, fire-protected 30 wall. 31 32 Ms. Moore-Sykes clarified that the Fire Chief Y does not have the authority to make these types of 33 decisions in the City of St. Anthony, which is why the applicant is present and requesting a 34 variance to the ordinance. 35 36 Mr. Shardlow expressed his respect for Fire Chief Malenick's concerns regarding fire safety. He 37 stated that in comparing an interior cooking area to an exterior cooking area, he has heard more 38 stories about people leaving the oven on,but not a grill. He stated that given the Fire Chief's 39 experience and the residents' knowledge and understanding of the code, they believe that it 40 would be preferable to establish the safest conditions possible. 41 42 Chair Stromgren closed the public hearing at 8:35 p.m. 43 44 Vice Chair Hanson stated that the only grills he sees around the area are located in open patio 45 areas. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes August 16, 2005 Page 13 1 2 Chair Stromgren questioned whether a variance is the appropriate vehicle to make this kind of 3 change. 4 5 Commissioner Jensen agreed stating that he does not think that a variance is the appropriate 6 procedure to use. He acknowledged and agreed with Fire Chief Malenick's concern with respect 7 to enforcement stating that he is not 100-percent sure that they are going to be able to find a way 8 to resolve this issue, He stated that a Conditional Use Permit would be a more appropriate 9 vehicle with some form of a text change. 10 11 Commissioner Hoska suggested working with the Fire Chief and the Fire Marshal noting that 12 from a safety standpoint, they could have some ideas to suggest. He stated that it would be very 13 frightening to have to fight a fire that way and he believes that working with the Fire Chief and 14 Fire Marshall would help to ensure that all safety issues are addressed appropriately. 15 16 Ms. Moore-Sykes reminded the Planning Commission that the Fire Chief does not have the 17 authority to make this decision or work with the developer. She stated that a text change with a 18 conditional use permit process would be a long session noting that she could see what the City 19 Council says and update the Commission. 20 21 Chair Stromgren clarified that this does not mean this is an avenue of rejection it just isn't the 22 appropriate avenue for this kind of request as it could be challenged in court. 23 24 Motion by Commissioner Jensen, second by Commissioner Hoska, to recommend denial of the 25 proposed Variance to allow gas-fired grills on balconies of the multi-family units of the Silver 26 Lake Homes project. 27 28 Motion carried unanimously 29 30 VIII. CONCEPT REVIEW 31 32 8.1 3645 Chelmsford Road NE—R1 to R2 Rezoning Request 33 34 Troy Martenson, 3645 Chelmsford Road NE, provided the Commission with photographs of the 35 property noting that the property is currently zoned R-1 with an existing 1940's style single- 36 family home on the lot. He stated that the lot has a 75-foot utility easement given to Xcel Energy 37 and is across the northern portion of the lot. He stated that they would like to change the zoning 38 to R-2 zoning to allow them to be able to build a double bungalow style home on the property. 39 He indicated that the property is located in a mixed-use area and believes that the proposed 40 double-bungalow style home would be an asset to the community, as it would remove an old 41 home with something new and more up to date. He stated that the had initially asked to rezone 42 for an R-3 Townhouse Zoning but the Council denied the request due to their concerns about 43 spot zoning and that it would be too dense for the area. 44 45 Chair Stromgren asked Mr. Martenson to further clarify his proposal. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes August 16, 2005 Page 14 1 2 Mr. Martenson provided the Commissioners with a copy of the proposed plan noting that the 3 structure would be designed with a hip roof that would give it more of a single-family look. He 4 provided the Commission with an overview of the proposed floor plan noting that they would 5 like to build two one-level units that would cater towards individuals who prefer the one-level 6 living. He stated that he works with the architect quite often noting that he is not set on a 7 specific idea at this point. 8 9 Chair Stromgren noted that the elevation on the first example shows a walkout arrangement and 10 asked for further clarification. 11 12 Mr. Martenson reviewed the elevations with the Commission noting that the sloped side of the 13 property would face east adding that they would have to install retaining walls on the north and 14 south end of the lot to provide a flat building surface. He stated that they could also build it with 15 a staggered look to make it appear more like a single-family home. He explained that the reason 16 they are trying to get it changed to an R-2 zoningwith the double-bungalow style is because it � � 17 would not make sense, at this point, to tear down the current structure and rebuild a single-family 18 home due to the large Xcel easement located on the property. 19 20 Commissioner Young asked if the front elevation would face to the east. Mr. Martenson stated 21 that the house would face to the west with the garage facing Chelmsford. He stated that the 22 driveway would come straight to the front and reviewed with the Commission. 23 24 Chair Stromgren stated that it would be very helpful if the Planning Commission could review a 25 clear set of development plans that would show how they would work the site including 26 excavation, elevation, slopes and .landsca in P landscaping. 27 28 Commissioner Jensen clarified that the R-2 zoning would take them through the permit process 29 whereas R-3 zoning would require a full site plan building process. 30 31 Ms. Moor - e Sykes confirmed stating that once the rezoning is changed and approved the applicant 32 would then go straight to the building permit process unless there is a variance. 33 34 Commissioner Jensen stated that it would be nice for the Planning Commission to get the real 35 opinion as to what the new width of the property would be if and when it is platted. He 36 acknowledged that with an R-2 zoning the re-plat might not be required but he would like to 37 know how the setbacks would be measured and from where. 38 39 8.2 Text Amendment Re: Egress Windows Permitted in the Sideyard Setback 40 41 Commissioner Jensen suggested adding, as Item B, verbiage that would deal with stoops that are 42 already covered, clean up some of the item verbiage to find a way that would allow Staff to make 43 some of the decisions and if they are not comfortable making the call then Staff could refer the 44 issue to the Planning Commission for review. He suggested capturing some of the changes that 45 are occurring in the market place. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes August 16, 2005 Page 15 1 2 Chair Stromgren noted that a stoop could include a ramp or stairs and suggested further 3 clarifying and considering a second process. He stated that they can't address every unique issue 4 but it could be better clarified. 5 6 Commissioner Jensen stated that the concern is that many of the properties were dealing with 7 life-saving improvements, which prompted the need to amend the verbiage within the code 8 language. 9 10 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that she likes the live-saving verbiage and reviewed with the 11 Commission. She suggested including the words `either'; `or'; and `and' to provide further 12 clarification. 13 14 Commissioner Jensen stated that a lot of different window-well styles are being introduced into 15 the marketplace that include staircases and are not just 3-feet deep anymore. He stated that some 16 of these differences should be considered. 17 18 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that Staff would prefer to be a proactive participant rather than a code 19 enforcer with restrictions. She stated that Staff has received several calls this summer regarding 20 the installation of egress windows adding that she would run their suggestions by City council 21 and provide their feedback to the Commission for additional comment. 22 23 Chair Stromgren suggested including the changes in a City newsletter to inform Community of 24 these changes. 25 26 8.3. Snyder's Drug 27 28 Dave Leonard, Owner, Snyder's Drug stated that their lease is up and they need to find a place to 29 locate their business. He stated that St. Anthony Marketplace has an empty space where they 30 would be able to include a drive-through window for the pharmacy. He stated that they would 31 not have to create any end cuts or change the widths adding that it would allow them to remain 32 within one block of where they are currently located. He stated that this location would meet all 33 of their needs and requirements adding that the interior of the current location is not in good 34 shape, which is another reason why they would like to relocate. 35 36 Chair Stromgren clarified that they would not have a canopy. Mr. Leonard clarified that they 37 would only need a protective canopy over the window because it comes in on the right side of the 38 building. He stated that it would also include a small speaker system similar to what is used at a 39 bank drive-up. 40 41 Chair Stromgren asked Mr. Leonard if he had any idea as to the number of transactions they 42 would process within an hour. Mr. Leonard explained that this area could accommodate two to 43 three vehicles without impacting the flow of traffic. He stated that they would probably handle 44 approximately six transactions per hour noting that this figure is probably a bit high. 45 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes August 16, 2005 Page 16 1 Commissioner Young asked Mr. Leonard if he has a copy of the site plan and asked him to 2 review the traffic flow from the site. Mr. Leonard explained that there is a curb cut that currently 3 comes into the center and they reconfigured the green space. He stated that they still have two 4 trees and have included more shrubs along the building adding that with the reconfiguration they 5 would use the same driveway to come in and exit. 6 7 Commissioner Young asked if it would be feasible for a car, entering in from Kenzie Terrace, to 8 turn directly into the drive-through lane without swerving into the flow of traffic. She stated that 9 she could see their intent adding that she also realizes that people would try to cut the corner in 10 order to get into the drive-through lane. Mr. Leonard stated that cars would probably not be able 11 to turn directly into the drive-through lane and reviewed the flow with the Commission. 12 13 Chair Stromgren suggested including an exit only sign at the rear that would restrict traffic. 14 15 Commissioner Jensen asked if the original approval of the plan required that this be a two-lane 16 for traffic flow. 17 18 The developer indicated that he has been talking with Snyder's about going into this area noting 19 that they did make them aware that they have been down this road before. He explained that this 20 would be for pharmacy use only and they are willing to have this use tied to the drive-through. 21 He acknowledged that there could be conflicts adding that they would be willing to turn this 22 section into a one-way passage on this side. He stated that if it becomes an issue it could be 23 addressed by making it a one-way. He stated that Snyder's has done a good job with the 24 landscaping noting that the operation would not be a 24-hour service. He stated that the 25 positioning of the driveway movement would prohibit the headlights from shining into the 26 neighborhoods. He stated that Snyder's is aware of the previous applications and the end results. 27 28 Commissioner Jensen noted that the original proposal for the center included a variance for the 29 parking that allowed 31 parking stalls and this concept sketch takes five spaces and gives back 30 two and would not need a variance to address the other three. He suggested that if they make it a 31 one-way they could pick up the five parking stalls. 32 33 The developer referenced the employee parking area noting that they could get the other three. 34 He stated that they would not have to go through the variance process to gain back the three stalls 35 and reviewed the parking areas with the Commission. 36 37 IX. PUBLIC INPUT 38 39 9.1 None. 40 41 X. INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION. 42 43 10.1 Zoning Ordinance Revision Discussion—Vehicle Sales 44 45 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that Staff has recently received several complaints from residents Planning Commission Meeting Minutes August 16, 2005 Page 17 1 regarding the number of`for sale' vehicles that are being parked in the Wiltshire Park School 2 parking lot. She stated that because this use is not listed as an allowable use in the Zoning 3 Ordinance, selling vehicles in this manner is not allowed and would be towed away at the 4 owner's expense and cited if these vehicles were parked on public property or public right-of- 5 way. She stated that Wiltshire Park is considered private property and as such, the police can 6 only respond if and when there is a call from the school staff. She stated that the Police and the 7 Public Works Department have been working with the School staff to determine a resolution to 8 this situation. She stated that she obtained a copy of the City of Falcon Heights' ordinance 9 regarding vehicle sales noting that this ordinance language was used as an example of a possible 10 ordinance that the City could adopt to alleviate the situation. She reviewed the proposed 11 language with the Commission noting that it would be sent to the City Attorney and the Police 12 Department for their comments. 13 14 Commissioner Jensen stated that signage would be more appropriate as they do not want to gate 15 the area. 16 17 Commissioner Jenson agreed stating that there is only one good way into the parking lot. He 18 stated that if they place signage appropriately they could also make a fee recommendation for 19 violations within the next year. 20 21 Chair Stromgren agreed stating that signage and a text change would help to enforce. 22 23 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that the City would have to get permission from the County or the 24 School Board noting that they are currently working with the School Board on potential signage. 25 26 XI. ANNOUNCEMENTS 27 28 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that she was recently informed that the Police of Chief, who has been 29 with the City of St. Anthony for 39-years, submitted his retirement announcement on August 1, 30 2005 and intends to retire on November 1, 2005. 31 32 XII. ADJOURNMENT 33 34 Motion by Vice Chair Hanson, second by Commissioner Hoska, to adjourn the meeting at 9:26 35 p.m. 36 37 Motion carried unanimously. 38 39 Respectfully submitted, 40 Bonnie Sullivan 41 TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. STAFF REPORT To: Planning Commission Report No.: VII.1 From: Kim Moore-Sykes, Assistant City Manager oubb Date: September 20, 2005 Subject: Conditional Use Permit Request-2829 Anthony Lane South Date Application Received: August 12, 2005 Property Address: 2829 Anthony Lane South Zoning District: LI 60-Day Expires: October 12, 2005 Requested Action: Eric Reiners,architect with Welman Sperides Architects,representative for The International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 49,is representing IUOE 49 at this public hearing for their application for a conditional use permit(CUP) for catering activities as a permitted by the City Code for the Industrial Zoning District. Background: The IUOE Local 49 recently completed the construction of a catering kitchen and related facilities,which they are interested in opening to the public for weddings and other special occasions. By allowing catering activities as a permitted conditional use, it will give the City the ability to place conditions on this use to protect the community and the public using these proposed catering facilities. Because the City's zoning ordinance did not allow this use in the Industrial Zoning District,the IUEO 49 requested that the Ordinance at Section 1640.03 be amended to allow catering as a permitted conditional use in the Industrial Zoning District. At their August 23rd meeting, the City Council approved the text amendment and after the required reading, the amended ordinance was published in the City's legal newspaper,making it effective. Mr. Reiners is now requesting a public hearing to consider granting IUOE 49 a conditional use permit for their catering services. Proposed Conditions: 1.) All parking must be contained to on-site parking lots. 2.) The Applicant must abide by and comply with all regulations imposed by the Hennepin County Public Health and the State of Minnesota. 3.) There will be no cooking of food one on site. Food may be warmed and prepared inasmuch as to ready it for serving. 4.) The Applicant will be responsible for the conduct of caterer,employees of the caterer, the clients using the catering facilities and the conditions of sobriety and order on the premises. 5.) The Applicant shall notify the Police Chief of St. Anthony prior to any catered event. H:\Planning\Staff Reports\2005\092005 Staff Report IU049CUP catenng.doc 6.) The City reserves the right to revoke this conditional use permit for violation of any provision or condition of this Conditional Use Permit. Attachments: • Applicant's Letter • Letter from Hennepin County Human Services • Building Plans showing Catering Kitchen and related facilities HAPlanning\Staff Reports\2005\092005 Staff Report IU049CLT catering.doc 3301 Silver Lake Road •St. Anthony,MN 55418 • (p)612.782.3301 • (f)612.782.3302 www.ci.saint-anthony.mn.us CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION A. GENERAL DATA NAME OF APPLICANT: International Union of Operating Engineers, Local #49 The above-named individual,firm or corporation hereby respectfully submits the following data in support of the preliminary information provided on the accompanying zoning application summary from dated for the purpose of securing a Conditional Use Permit. CONTACT PERSON: Hansen James 612-788-9441 Last Name First Daytime Phone Number PROPERTY ADDRESS: 2829 Anthony Lane S Minneapolis , MN 55418 B. PROJECT INFORMATION ,��,-� '�� _�� , 1. Specify the section of the ordinance which a ;p1' to this project: ��:.G9`lAY`' �� 2. Brief parlative description of this request: 4D 3. Written justification for the request,including discussion of how any Potential conflicts with existing nearby land uses will be minimized: W_A 4. Check all additional supporting crocuments and data which are being submitted to help explain this project proposal: site plan topographic map Ek,"d'etailed narrative "operation plans l engineering plans 7(*'a dscaping plans 0 elevations I hereby certify with gnature t a ata on my application forms,plans and specifications are�}te and correct to the best of my knowledge: Signature phcant Date In accordance with 1665.04 of Chapter 16,Zoning and Land Use,the City of St. Anthony hereby ❑ approves, ❑ denies the foregoing application for a Conditional Use Permit. If approved,said approval is subject to the following general and special provisions: (continued on the next page) C:\Documents and Settings\Laura Flinn\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK88\2005 CUP Application Information.doc Conditional Use Permit Application Page 2of2 GENERAL PROVISIONS 1. This permit is not valid until the resolution has been approved by the City Council. 2. This permit does not constitute a building permit,occupancy permit,sewer system permit,fence permit,sign permit,or the like. Separate permits may have to be applied for and obtained in order to accomplish all the goals of the project authorized herein. 3. The issuance of this permit does not negate the need to secure other permits from other local units of government,state agencies,or federal agencies who may also have jurisdiction over any portion of your project. EXPIRATION A Conditional Use Permit expires one(1)year after it has been issued unless the use for which the permit has been granted is in effect. Extension may be granted provided the applicant submits a letter to the Assistant City Manager requesting an extension 30 days before the expiration of said approval. The letter shall state the facts of the request, showing a good-faith attempt to utilize the permit,and it shall also state the additional time being requested to begin the proposed construction.The City Council may grant extensions not to exceed one(1)year. C:\Documents and Settings\Laura Flinn\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK88\2005 CUP Application Information.doc International Union of operating Engineers LOCAL NO. 49, 49A, 49B,49D, AND 49E MINNESOTA • NORTH DAKOTA • SOUTH DAKOTA(East Half) THOMAS H.PARISEAU, President GLEN D.JOHNSON JOSEPH L.RYAN,Vice PresidentBusiness Manager/Financial Secretary KYLE D.JONES, . ;" 0 •7e Recording-Corresponding Secretary JAMES J.HANSEN,Treasurer Affiliated with the A.F.L. -C.I.O. 2829 Anthony Lane South,Minneapolis, MN 55418-3285 Phone (612) 788-9441 Toll Free (866) 788-9441 • Fax (612) 788-1936 June 29, 2005 Saint Anthony Village Administrative Offices 3301 Silver Lake Road St. Anthony, MN 55418-1699 Re: Text amendment zoning To whom it may concern: Local 49, International Union of Operating Engineers, request to include catering/banquet operations as a permitted conditional use in the Industrial zone district for the following address: 2829 Anthony Lane S. If you have any questions, please contact James Hansen @ 612-788-9441. Sincerely, James J. Hansen, Assistant to the Business Manager/Treasurer, Local 49 JJH/llf BRANCH OFFICES Box 279 2002 London Road 308 Lundm Blvd. 1848 2nd Ave SE 8381 North Enterprise Drive Bagley,MN 56621 Duluth,MN 55812 Mankato,MN 56001 Rochester,MN 55904 Virginia,MN 55792 (218) 694-6206 (218) 724-3840 (507)625-3670 (507) 282-0401 (218) 741-8190 2109 251st Street 2901 Twin City Dr. 3002 1st Ave.No. 1521B 24th Ave So. 101 South Fairfax Avenue St. Cloud,MN 56301 Mandan,ND 58554 Fargo,ND 58102 Grand Forks,ND 58201 Sioux Falls,SD 57103 (320) 252-2162 (701)663-0407 (701)232-2769 (701) 775-3969 (605) 336-1952 ® BUILDING 2827 ANTHONY LANE SOUTH, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55418 FAS � ° TELEPHONE (612) 788-7468 FAX (612) 788-1914 To Whom It May Concern: We at Building Fasteners have No Objections to allow Catering/Banquet Activities as a conditional use in the Industrial Zone District. We neighbor the Union Hall on the west side and the Management within the Union of Operating Engineers 49ers has been kind enough to allow our employees to use their parking lot as we have exceeded our space available on our own property. Sincerely,4 c-�� Todd Boo Executive VP Building Fasteners 2827 Anthony Lane South Mpls, MN 55418 May 25,2005 Kim Moore-Sykes City ofS St.ve Anthony �T T ,� �T 3301 Silver Lake Road j.�1Vl�-',Lv St.Anthony,MN 55418 SPERIDES Re: International Union of Operating Engineers—Local 49 A R C H I T E C T S Partial Conditional Use Kim: Per our phone conversation, I am forwarding reference plans for the Local 49 building and a copy of the approval letter from the Hennepin County Human Services Department regarding the design and construction of the catering kitchen that was installed as a part of the recent renovation and addition. I will inform the administrative representatives at Local 49 that we have spoken and update them on the schedule you proposed to me for staff review, Planning Commission evaluation,Public hearing and Council approval. We understand that you must meet with City staff to review the building plan and proposed use, meet with the City Attorney and review various approaches to the issue, and summarize staff comments and Attorney input for"Concept Approval'at the Planning Commission meeting to be held on June 21". We also understand that following preliminary approval by the Planning Commission, the issue will have to be published and opened up for public comment at a public hearing on July 19`x, and assuming positive feedbac' City Council can approve the use at their meeting on July 26`h. Since the intended use should not overlap or interfere with normal industrial uses and neighboring businesses,we are not anticipating any opposition. If you have any questions or require any other information, please do not hesitate to contact me. SincereeAritects, WelmaE Principal Enc.: Building Plans,Catering Kitchen approval Cc: Project File 7700 France Ave.So. Suite 375 Edina,MN 55435 phone:(952)996-9662 fax:(952)996-9663 wsarclutects@welmanarch.com '" %.$Zu-L ® .=.ice Hennepin County Human Services Department Public Health Protection Epidemiology:(952)351-5230 Epidemiology and Environmental Health Environmental Health:(952)351-5200 1011 South First Street,Suite 215 FAX:(952)351-5222 Hopkins,MN 55343-9413 www.hennepin.us December 17, 2004 APPROVED Welman Sperides Architects, LLC 7700 France Ave. S.#375 Edina, MN 55435 Regarding: Local 49—International Union of Operating Engineers, St.Anthony, MN Dear Mr. Reiners: The plans as submitted, along with the additional information on received December 16th, now appear to meet the general requirements of Hennepin County Ordinance Number 3 and MN Rules, Chapter 4626 and are approved. EquipmentlEquipment Installation 1. Provide the shop drawings for the following custom fabricated items: #2 custom scrapping sink and 3-basin utensil washing sink. Plumbing 2. A basic plumbing plan has now been received. No correspondence has been received from MDH indicating the plumbing plans have been approved. 3. No grease trap is to be installed per the City of St. Anthony. 4., Contact Kris Anderson, Hennepin County Licensing Agent, at (952) 351-5202 for a Hennepin County Food License application prior to scheduling a pre-opening construction inspection with this office. 5. This establishment cannot open for business until it has been inspected and approved. •To schedule a pre-opening inspection, call me at (952) 351-5215 at least one day in advance of the desired inspection time. Food deliveries cannot be accepted until this department gives approval. Please submit any changes to the plan and all additional required information as soon as possible. If you have any questions, feel free to call me at(952) 351-5215. Sincerely , ynn A. Moore Hennepin County Supervising Environmentalist i CC: Debra Anderson, Hennepin County Senior Environmentalist City of St. Anthony, Building Official An Equal Opportunity Employer Recycled Paper TRASH ,Yr I 11 ,\ / I I L (E) 11111 Y - 4 NOT BOX BY CATERING SERVICE ® Y � 12 13 17 � I I � O U O 13MOP SINK Lu MECH RM Im m z Lu ROOM �U ° 0 ROOM FINISHES 5 10 FLOOR: QUARRY TILE 5 BASE: QUARRY TILE COVE BASE 2a 0 UJALLS: FRP r — CEILING: ACT "CLEAN ROOM MYLAR" OR EQUAL 1 ® 1 r 1 �/4 EKITCHEN1 =1'-m" _ - LOCAL 49 N 04-006 sz�r ama CATERING KITGNEN DAA 11-18-04 7700 FRANCE AVE.,S. nays,°rt or: DR,.VIN BY: WELMAN SME 375 ADDITION OF CATERING KITCHEN HL SPERIDES �a5A'�r 55433 atrarr xo: A n C a I r B C r a L L C FAX (952) 996.9663 _ PHONE (952) 996.9662 STAFF REPORT To: Planning Commission Report No.: VII.2 From: Kim Moore-Sykes, Assistant City Manager Date: September 20, 2005 Subject: Conditional Use Permit Request- Drive-Thru for Snyder Drugs Date Application Received: August 15, 2005 Property Address: St. Anthony Market Place Zoning District: LI 60-Day Expires: October 15, 2005 Requested Action: David Leonard,Snyder's Drug Stores, Inc.,is requesting a Conditional Use Permit(CUP) for a drive-thru as required by the City's Zoning Code. Section 1635.03 requires a CUP when a drive-thru is being proposed for a use that is otherwise permitted under Section 1635.02. Snyder's Drug Store, as a drug store, is a permitted use under Section 1635.02, (cc). Background: Mr. Leonard appeared before the Planning Commission in a concept review at their August 16th meeting, proposing to move Snyder's Drug Store from its current location in the St. Anthony Shopping Center to the end cap unit in the St. Anthony Marketplace. He indicated that the lease at their current location is soon up and since the current site no longer suits their needs they became interested in the end cap when they were advised that it was available. Mr. Leonard stated that this unit is attractive to Snyder's because it is an end cap and they could easily install a drive-thru for the convenience of their physically challenged customers and parents with small children. The Planning Commissioners discussed the traffic flow of the proposed drive-thru window and it was suggested that to alleviate traffic issues that the proposed drive-thru be a one-way. Proposed Conditions: 1.) No canopy over the drive-thru. 2.) Orient the traffic to a one-way flow pattern to minirmze potential traffic conflicts. 3.) Hours of Operation will be limited to 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. 4.) Positioning the driveway to limit and/or prevent headlights from shinning into residential neighborhoods. Attachments: • Application • Building Plans showing proposed Drive-Thru H:\PIanning\Staff Reports\2005\092005 Staff Report Snyders Drug CUP drivethru.doc litho 3301 Silver Lake Road •St. Anthony,MN 55418 • (p)612.782.3301 ' (f)612.782.3302 www.ci.saint-anthony.mn.us CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION A. GENERAL DATA NAME OF APPLICANT: Snyders Drug Stores, Inc. The above-named individual,firm or corporation hereby respectfully submits the following data in 8 support 5f the preliminary information provided on the accompanying zoning application summary from dated /12 for the purpose of securing a Conditional Use Permit. CONTACT PERSON: Leonard, David 952/936-2475 Last Name Fust Daytime Phone Number B. PROJECT INFORMATION 1. Specify the section of the ordinance which applies to this project: 2. Brief narrative description of this request: Drive-thru pharmacy window for the drop off and pick up of pharmacy prescription items. 3. Written justification for the request,including discussion of how any potential conflicts with existing nearby land uses will be minimized: All existing curb cuts can be used. Minor adjustments would be required for the driveway to the window. 4. Check all additional supporting documents and data which are being submitted to help explain this project proposal: site plan ❑ topographic map ❑ detailed narrative ❑ operation plans ❑ engineering plans landscaping plans ❑ elevations I hereby certify my signa all d on my pli 'on forms,plans and specifications are true and correct to the best of my knowle - 8/12/05 ignature of A cant Date In accordance with 1665.04 of Chapter 16,Zoning and Land Use,the City of St. Anthony hereby ❑ approves, ❑ denies the foregoing application for a Conditional Use Permit. If approved,said approval is subject to the following general and special provisions: (continued on the next page) C:\DOCUME-1\davel\LOCALS-1\Temp\2005 CUP Application Information.doc T'� ��;�sr -,,,,,,��m�,�xa.,�r_;�eW� ..�'..:�...,r, .,...-e...�1� rr,�.uz•-...�., a,�.:- .�.., ,u�r..:;�.;:�. rti�r..rn <•a�Y.,r�:»w„t�,.rs�� -�c��..:.�ys.��. ,-.•,r.:,�,,�.,ljI.FUr,l".r!.__��,1}</.r C.r.>�r3',�-�,&/,:�:'.te,_:..1\\.•.:J.r-r:...,.y-....,..l.a�,.,u4.t.R,:',cA�..I\mC..:r�,-.�h-r"l,wI f,'Js V1\n'r.r.�.J./-c,,•.<.r."M:!�...A:.:t.♦.•1,yna,.kJ,.,,�,h..�,...:,1....:r..-.w'.\,'r1�-r*.,..,,�1..}.!J�..,'..�-..;rmI�r,.,I,,+r��ti,d:[:��.'',n,,:i.C..m�:f_u-,...rr,._�5,•.-..t!.�..te„.tl T�Y.rrMr.5Ir_,'__ti�,,;.,:,.r II If.n,P\CU�:+ha3,+�I:br\IL.l'r�V,,�_.,t�,,,'),S_r.�:.6�u,:r.`rr'.,�.�!..,�;,..\.t�✓.ki r>;icr..L,...l_-1..\`I_l._.-r,xz.<r..a\..�..�.-,r-.,__.:..:1..,\':l:,.!rN!Ms r'u�r,,�..l�.+.!Nte1..R�>."irr.4Ii:A,:jC.YI:.S�'.=N,S.�::.F�..,a.r!..,�.�,v..::__!:.�_x 1.C♦,k/aari..v.�_,,'{h.�qJ.':..,�T\�R,�,.�.'��.l�.?v4.s.,u!_.%.�a..rC\"\�w�.fq. I^L\♦fr,rb..,'.,t*_.:�^tl..,s.�f.l'.icr..rf..i IJI'.,��'IFk,rr1 rexr.''I:{L,-':��_��•rr,..�..nr.,�,.h.,�♦.,.,.-�e.,r.,-Iw.ti�.,.,�,'!Y:...il\k/+"!�'>.vt�,-,f.L,3...C\\.!J`'.r-".t<.�••-,l.:".._-.t..::.-�.\�rr,:"r..�'�,.•/�e.,„C\\r��a°,�,.,,.,...1da.u.l♦.;.FN�.i.%„:°,�.,r-.,,,:r,,..-,,.,�p;:'�:k\+!,.+..�.N•r,�'r•,',.\"w'•rf.\'-'-x.•\,.i.'�.q..,v....:,,�. MIR ♦•+a.,•,?\!'N.R,ri\u't:r.,✓,<.-�'iITT; e,�(•N'J.n,n,�vc..:,:.P♦�, i .l 1:'14 fr[ rFJ 1 / ,r,�,�,,l,..�H-,_s:c'.-.,k.--Nr--�c!R♦f!-3=r,-3J-�.\..rq.....�a�.{...:-w.��"L\:,Y-��;.-,-F.e_--.Tt 1•,,- CA [r'=, y1f:i- �! Y. [ ! G 1. 1 f I rf r! rf _!,--/ r1 ! I r! ! r/ r r \ ♦ ♦ \ ♦ \ ♦�, (a ,�< -:,.. \ E.` �r,�,1..zt> t,Z�s1 ,C:e"c1 1• S° 1 \.:,�1z��,.`t4�\"L-;:a t zU:+:;\ \ ..l\'^'�C fr-�'rCf{C �lr*a i!C 1 rr ✓``..�.+..-!f_r_r..✓!_..tet i.. r✓,�i�Ju �/ i1\iz' �! �fw.,:�! et•`♦ �' .•�,.r��Jv actr,-.,1�a�>•,♦ r.a-f\.^r- lv-�\:�+t, �4_✓r r, iv:-'/,-1., r:�r ! _ -�- r mD ,.-B <. �r., P/a\"��:1 „ _.�,.�F"♦' :4'- \-,.-.x< �, .5;,\. ..•*_ ... -.. ..\, �, a r _/.r: ,1-.:!\'fir l 2 >r/ r. i rt�! 1 D�r;9 `\.♦ i._SP1 'C �,,,c!°r-`\.�v`r: -.. yr�J'nn _4' lsLx �fr`�'A�.', ¢4\fit \!';, (r;fmfr.5'�rFtr.. ac.•`•,'M'�Lj h\yl�.r!'\:,l.t \. ,/ .o.r !' I'",� .4,:Y, 1 .:t-+-♦_;,:. -- �,-� -_ ___ _�.. d,,. 41: \ . r.-r ti� 1 ✓ }µ'(p c f: AI = =_ .� ?! l 4', r♦ Yu�� ,- r 3.M,r:/1 \r�`�r��-a�_nr i,7•I�7- 2�?f!�/♦ /"4. l�I!\:div[♦w `?v,l��U'p ,-/4- ,r•�♦r7f\rl:�r `�� rF-_ ,, i,=� F�._.7.r\-_-. �� e •♦.,I.-t.n.a yl n, ,•�.\r;( � L M ':4^ i < •!�� {•,d , �.!=-r- _.� _ - :.-._,--.,. � .. :7, �., I a\•v,'h ,,,.�w��,.hL�.,,fs1�,�;,4}4.�t a�� v.�-!1`7 �'` oiE'��<-nvR rr ,/ ,1 .�-�G+.'7. �2 CI i `:/�' ru r -r= ��y\-L� /,�_/..x,':r�_r �,�- 'r.,�•�,�I ,,.r'� r�� C.,. I l /i'-I �-f. t - J`C =� �-� � �aN 1'^ a � �r ff.'s r ±� �-:\.::; \- � �. G.., _♦,:._ .. ,.,i,.,. �.`I�r�..,.- L,. u,- �s+.l fl'I� .ah.'r�' i�:r�--. Y. �'ll......e l,�r-=��_ !�.��-?y. -+��r`.� +� � /,.n "' ,X' >/•: Ir, ary :.!�• _ ,€[- 5t°:ri; { ;a../��!''�!♦�, .-.-/-E +f�,��"W ! rl; .l: �.� :.axy� ti,/7.�.;n4 y"\ .,ti"�Iph.',.`♦r.-_w_ :}r,.-. _�, .w_ -- '•_. \ :_ ',. I.I, ,.\IC ...,..J`+,I�,G f<.•.. �' ,a�f rir yYC �-'�=;.\ro�L\ fh:r_�V_��.��.-F.n::S�>:��f.4i�l�r. YL'I„[,f� �✓J. ,,F �lt'�,a�� 1.s .!.,_ter \..r v r I.��/ ,,, 'r i °�, � I x 1�:- f1.S ^..'_svr•Jrl�r!`� �i,'=\} r;[\s[ r' •!''h \r Iti'rF,#,,\ w i:.".'.\• R _ r ♦ _-c.:`-_v..\.,,._ ♦.-_ ,.-- rr _.-- .. -,-T:t .:♦. 'P" -eh� .t { {l, [ faY,r.,„ „t..r .r, r [ [>„✓ •t :t- 4 _ _.y-�f:._r r !_ .. _ •3. -,.:Sa,St,. \.�, '`�.N \ \..t:..I k�,'l,li�.l:.Mlli, +a3 '1 .'111 i�{CllAl..��•.,r.L.: 1' c •+-C. - -1-'- e\.. ♦ . _ � -r + � >r 4��r�.rlrsv ?�U"I m� rJ� 11I,J�"� rs��v; �: ? S 0 =i Y7 Z Bti0 00rh 'Yr ,'°'.�,' -:nxK- ov-71'h�`11t.+,3;� Y• _.-s .rY3"'r'�rf�,r R'`r•[ .-i t€4.r'f'`rItx- f/�3,-{'.. ^c.•--�^rw♦y, :. or :+.I Yul } ,.1-'::iC +yi .\,.�\3,.��...•.,,t,:.� lst} ��5�^.` \y'T: i,.. rrs r<-a.,-!ati r <!-! ,/,�\.-r. r,r!♦ 11 r -:r,.a.icr L...✓t-•�.../[,.r•/�,•-r r ,ter, .1-%�. �/v i,ro'�✓ 41 ,�1 l•�,._; ._t.., ,�.,? .�.r:^-F.,,{'� M fl.:%!-, i'?'•!4\�,.;v. - ._ •.... a., ,, ., -.- .Sr t.. ♦ - „3_ ,s..,� r'. v ��.-.,:- ,>a, ♦r[r-�.V..yl-♦y:\i ♦.r'\r•��7 S/'�;5.� �,. ✓....r-r.,.....r r 1<.: \,.,S \ �\ \ ,\a ;.>..,\'F�',\ ,\ ,',c' .♦ 61x #a�t,.� t KC: ,,t- 1 c_,;,t,•_\ti\ �xl-�1�--+i{�tii ./,t \..�\ /C.,,,C, `�\ It::f.'"f -/:1:r•lL,. :vM•'1-- [\v+f1,rltrl..a.ls\vrl<.//i-5.. 1.,,r,.R.,.:•/ ,-il...r.f,,. '`.� \�.:�: � ♦ ...... �J� /-. :r��',r�? r a. � r,K¢C �t::/i r �i,,.moi"7"��P",�".:/'��'- "r f C',�; ,:°' rJf '' In .Ga��♦ J��#"c:!♦,F„-G-�,.r IC-�,,J��v:r,r♦ !\�r1. .1;.. ,_ei , 7�� i\ /,. .r \, :�_ ,, \,..,,,a r♦ - / '.�:-T, r li�It...r . f� r �!I'1,♦ '�!, �� I� •\© '}-(-i \✓_ .♦/ `- \ : �1, -=_ ..i +uI , .rub.- �.{ - _.a! f. /�-�-1 rC,.r n..Qh.:f rL..r r�.11,.✓,'AErr 1l,l+jj,\:.X� ,,!,r.1 .\ •., '\r-Fil,♦N \�\le yg1d".1!11'1 Jw.._IrP, SIH �" { ,`y,:II^ p h•V• r .'� N" - iu,(t,i? :{.L,r r:!.:nr :�. !'I 1 r K ! _-� r - ,-! -r i,_ + - • r,�� ,�--t /4hl ;:v'.I g , � ,ro .�-:wI'.,•a ,♦ a oil•�I+ur. �� *�. �_ :„li�i, .r, t,,h:,��p,�u>�- n".r: ��-��1�1Yh .4. \,✓tr �.I�NFhr��"�4�� .I{'rr , hrl f=,: '!�:!. .:!_/.,,.!• �yya .1., r :., *, !v'+1,9y.\n .♦�?'7'� .: �^. j'' ♦ ♦STMT.:, r4 r,..,�\ `N"I- ,-1"ffll ., ,.Y _ ...h .....�L.i•r\ „ �. .t.� `..... - ��C_. •,-r.. f r',;.'':•,� /GtS�i wr'{� 4v ,, .._ lr�;j:. .r.r'.� -.�---__; ,-- ., -,..-..� .�_,. �.,..• ��:,.,,r .,4�..�.:6 �,.. !-,ley Jam,. �� ;i,.1� ,"q��k:y rink6�..a.v:y�,:Al.S1„�C:�.\ ,w 1,.:..Ir�`M^., , y,,�,.}:,. .,.:, wv..., -./�.:{ .fi o -a=,..:/,.�li^ar �-/4 -s.-��#.,,..r<�v-1r :✓i,.rr'. r .ir .v -r I -/., -�/. ;/ ;,.1 i, 1. i'vt'�V`4):,../'y ,L�-+f „,Ir,�, Y'N� c^:Lw. J s�rv; 'd' �\ ',n." ry��z�-.� •.��::\ ;._.-.°�_� �_.� (J,,my: �-, it` ��rf � i� r- r-__.-€-.r � -r ar_ r r='+ \�'�'.',',--_`p=.:♦. I •h�.�: ;,.d� \^F•�;. I I: I,:,r,.. q ,♦r1-„ I� ;,.\.,�nt�(': Lr. ll :,r....u : ra.-,.L -x l.. _ 1..�-r.:.r[_ _-J, _I_ r :rt:,rL F,r�: ,i,[..v.ey',h�'I,.r[,:��^'� .1. �I,r:.:h �y'.f, '�rJ,4a �.•�I� �\ ""W' .• !'!!V„ Jt'IiL�. ---+ILw 'U ,.r, . ':'lL;�.. ,,i C�__- .,.r,. _.__-atL: _�- , _ _ . _ tk .. i :Jlj7...,_.,:Y IM .n xJ;�'i"P�!lh,. ,:1 ,FI ,7.1.,d, W ',•"�1 hl� :..1 ,i :!'o:!:I. w . k .Y� 2 t �_ _ ��. t�,�hrW �y.: x1; 1.. �lh 4Ui1 IIId.�,rl'.11�i am 1. ltip'I�IhA I�'.. f1i �hi 1..(141��k-. ' a. Y E ©S3 7 c I - ><,,:vt \,/µ'';,. ♦, a.v {I,1 '!,„.,\.•!'Y�,I,W ,•l A::.» /l'f'i4.1 �N,,:\�+U +}I !�': r'.4"/u'i :j.,: 9 � _�`� 0.� ti, ++:I�r- ', rel:. •,vr. ..�,"9 .,.� '__ F '.:.:a ! `�.ti l,�•!♦r �v,�t+,�•f�rr*r?`,� r .-4!r ♦✓r,.,, rralv ;�vEr.\�,,j.�;.r�'�C�. ..,I•,!,;.,�;��r�:\.:,, a +: .., rte :�C*r^.G.,,'va Wit- . ;•.�£.-+-�-� _��h-. S1r�-, �a37}I,iir.�l�il. siY. \z/h,. li t 1.,::' •f\.....,�'I , '.'_..\M ,,".I'`\ r'/:.'/,.s'-I n iu�:i t•l „/, �-^�s.•/\ / ass,• � ^n4�. -•��y!,�_,a Vi. <:.,!♦ /-,-.,=r-t F, F,:'•f,! Y �,c� /♦ Ea.�:'. r �C�..-f, +\-i�_ `, �1i z.�- 1 ti- .��./\�f�\C! 'eY�'°. 14 r,IL"�C( L yk T},liq+thh�r �=� „I� '. \ �/ �/ �i t \r,\t.1t \ \:.,�.. \ t..,.:1�a.•.�,. \.�,�, .1s...\f \r-•`...._\. .,,-a`i S" -•,,i,;",\..., `�:�! r\.�J;U�, _,.o.,,'.'�v c),.y1:;;� ,F ,k;.:. :,�-,s �t _ :eft,f..=�,,aRL r\.,.f,� Y fr; .ltr! /f;af .,f rs r-, i �1 .l z .r/ �c 1, / ur:��,r,,.r��z(;.fv, y..\r,,•.,uy �/f�{1.�,r�;r.�.,l�i,l�r/ _rE'a,_r< r<�r� l�.�L�. �...� lr` ..�. ��r-��a �zr tr 1�� .�\. _�-�L��lj tr-.\:rte -1„�-t� t --•,\��„��.��Sa..,�,\ •.��.�ti�t�,nj 1^ -.\��r va�l�,;t,�eCl�\.... '.11 F:.-<' ya+....1_.1_.`,}r,y�:..A-t�7,7�.e: (.��.. ��. ��0 • 1"i,,,`;:,tv. ,, .yoy�f.,•---fr='�/=t---,E-�i�a/,v-y;4>t��-��ti�i-�}j:��,-�E-7.-�la,v`1a/-a--v/-�,---*\r=te��ci-\s--__�_��..•- •.\�\l7`�''-v�>/,.,'J:lt�p/-.�.�♦ r.,,,..U;.,;fr'7\♦rl,„,.S♦f�.-. 1:�.�,�R3f�.�\rif:n`*,1♦s�t.�,f��+:!l'slq:,�t�,,{�_'�J,•Ltil4,�!.•\1•,r!,+/-�.1v.1,^!:�tJl,-v�.[.rL♦.rlr.\,-lay.\�/!i-.�.vl,:tiY_��!=&-is7--f�`,r f�-t,�'�l..,\„:;r�_�r-u,�pI'7r♦.';-;_<��..r:/\-��tiB 5:�,+.�;�.-'_h'.��.-�i.r�y„•z^:\.s,!*•':��,..."�nvrc�r,v:r�..._Lw1m.\L-;"�...�"�VJ�.:\•�r-'.�`...^�''. ' M.-., ;w4�, _.,.,-.� ___-..,;.� ,\,,. t-%� .•�' -�A i`��_, .,.. ,�\. ,,�„....h rw ri�,.,/\r�++11.,Vin:�"ti�i,�r� ✓-R. €F,r.L\-`ar6 Wil.,.r .z_I-.,.R_ x€,�/=� L,�L`d..11r,r''',,T.3r. � ;�u+' \rT? .rtir.;1,: .yleyi4n.\r:�€-.r- '\r,:�.=_-�. r..-� "<_._ -_.\ �1�,,\1� ..\ �:♦i!,� .6`,rd.� .,l�r.,� ,\r. _..,� _, t _� \ �:` a",�. �4r., w„w.�',.i..,:q ��\n �p11,1 uz�.,G, \.Wq,CIA _Il hl,,:w-.,1 ''MI I �.1,�\ �....�. C.-:F_. _ �-.-_�-_ -= 1 .�\ \..i,,,.dl;fl Mt A.�,>.. It!m'.�.,•,!I �e.\,.:.r r;e,:r4�.=,J a-��, /tiv v-! ��:F� �r--��✓v-•fln';,+i r-,W ,-f+;;.�✓' -n i-v.:F�.11 � �W"..r x�+ .�! t-E✓:�_��-i -�_� -: T�`1�� __...= ..,,,q d.: ,��I.I.�. I •. .�..I ,�ar....,�1 �F- ♦-:1•:-,- v, .-,� ,.�-._�.-\•r.�- �:.��+u��r�.��\z.. rlr+ �4.,.F.,i {d,ti�'!��,n,�"(=, qr,r:.,..f;^4,..i,. _ ,�� _E�...?E�,�r�€1e..11��-'J-i--r�E�f-1-e.�e-#�,�-t.�.v,.,!_..iu}�•G.l�!d._J.�� w7ti., rr�.k.R��IC�.S:��` iL�C>`��f�r �':-��i�ti��t-+�-z��r'1 ` 7=,`..G.L�1�'!',��IiY�'>v!,�L,`y.� i`.2frk{_,♦�'rrJ'd l'�..{4♦iu,'IL .s. -_�!'<�._-! -.r< s�-r.�Euf« J\ i`v;�fv1J ,%ti_�J WI .,�n +'m•-`i=7,.,,%.;^�F��'FS•�lvu+�, _ ':_"f^��=� /,ta�_r,,-�-may\_..ss�G:v-�--.1•�-J-_=fv=/ �f "P ..1,-. \�.a. 3,a!-.+r %..e +,!, t-r ..y[, r *f_r '-r r....h: Y, r..r1:� .. rr. ^+.! .. ,a' \ �,. �• _ -=v _ ,. �,.,,`_ ,-_t -,r �:, _- _ «I qkA{.. ,-,f r{ 11, .r T`7.,.i i,. L. �„C;7.r '{cl--� r/ nF�"-r.L✓F_-€-,r7� {.f'_rr,�_ rf\.:{!w4.: r`y/ ,\,:�...♦r i,a \r'i'I },',\''.r �5.-_-`.R t-.rJ ...!...f- -r --� ..•! moi-`•-'+�-- --- � v., h b `5...G II}i.-U... IF+-.:-�Jr�. �ryY,.,likl�i _�.�5��`i,!.�__ L:'�,� � --�.,,,.. �c \'e'.� C�'�titr \�r'�w+Jl�Iltl'9y�`��¢1� n JI,. I�:YI.:etc.I�I l .�,1, li'.:-. _�_N[.. J\. _ ,.1.{- �.. !. :�.'r.1'.,IIdY.\::�t...G\ /Y,..l�,I ! l;,a 1.1,14.v,.rr: =�,:+/.\ / •r_�/", ./:\,.f-l- �f;-.e.Gi< f-3/ #r./=w/:�/ �J - s/- i, �..I ,' ♦r+., < -:\.--.-� \r,4.♦, ,,\ =a .,�•`.,♦, -,�� *.�.','x e�-.\:•.\. `♦....;�„ .�'r::v!"�'r-:[�l -:.- � ,._ �._�:,.�<, -h1. 3 t, �...- __ ..1.; �..�v, s\ ,„\�'.�4, nw. <\.-.\ :-atit�/ : ,: -- - rr•.% vF ��/,..�x /,T,..�fn I�+�.f, ff rfc.r.f;.r[ 1f=<[,,rl,<!,l.'f♦.I.<!._r• r.<♦r 4/ gip.:.m7�r/�r.�r `;r. `Sr:`ri'+r'.�r Sx ..r � \..9-?r.♦ ..,.,\ �!I A ..>*M ♦.. �-+,\ �-1 �\ �.��♦'. C:.�\: �\.:Via,•. �1�:;1;:iz1«�+tC�\.-\----• '!.4,....z„'S:31:a ;C,`xtf�-/\u'�:�C�;t\ l•:,Itkir f �/C.T, {'•e..Cz,1:,:.11 F'�,:/L< f,/ --..1,, „!.ru.r! rel 1 ,;!. i rl.._l, rI »S^!ti�,!F,+'f\..,,r,,..�r�r< 1�r c�r%�-c•4.afr �.t r s� .tea sem, 's J�.. rte..,�,J`�. r,��ti't"?`:�•r � rC.r. 1,.� 1 „S14�C 1�-l�s�\ i).. \ 1-.�<at�,1.�. ♦�..�:-. ., \>r-"�: .if?_] �-.fe�..�7;.r'-.�'�p'��,�--Jl -y 2.�_`'er�w..d -r'�14�. ,c .,..a�..,..., ,aJ^�at.. pi: /♦ !:,\�,p��r\.�r, r ,i,\ r�.!v�`i r,.-y��r, r,t, ��.;.?v ! y�>sy +l,f��lr,�.!J �rz' }�d� :o;r��ur€�r�,,7y.d.ri':r1 Is��n �'�r��7o� - .r aC,��:�i��'�.r•_�._R�t;,., �Ix,� ��,�v ', ,,f..'1 ��"•+,. ,�� - „1;,...,; t'1.::.35_..\a 1..E. 'f1,i.k,.�, �,•-��ve�s .:�=1�=�::sa�: ,�,.""'-`,��,�lC ti,�� >�-�r.•..�5. r-�F-�E'�-.t /h�/,l,[ I f��r'xr-�✓'�"S t /� i �l [�.tl�eK�v!,_#ter/ �[� - iYr_.-- .,r ,-�"'=r_ r r'--'^�.---� �-e:. �i�` r.��s.u ><:-.:.r r �rC`xC� �.C- �� t ��••�\ '1 -.-�� i:�:�' ,t:.,:;; -lw�;•-+��ir/,M-�!��. •i,. rw`;...fv /,I.-.a<rr , yt;,�.f� r� .��., 1-��., �•� .,..--<-�_ ��__h_.� /,moi.-.r. ,i,..}.,�',�, { 4+,-f.<.!� I\ i. rlv rv.,..l !♦%./� .,r �f' - / l'.i. h,\ ,.\M \I.\ ,.\`� n '-�:'�.:♦ \_.?.- ♦.:.�--..v �:�_ .. - --_-_ _-.,,.. ...lr\ :.,.,..I �.i• pl �n.,r, :\- .w., ,r. i • .\. .a __�♦ e. l_=!\-t- zl-fyu.r,.�� ,! T !.✓I .� �d..r°I � .,fir .�[ rY _r-/:_rR -m afr,rF n=�i !\F.��,�,_ 4 �r,.�i r�r,,M� i'l/„I� ♦I ��, r r♦• .I�`.\ \, ,\. -. ♦ ,cx�� ..----•, .`,^- r- fl I�, . , w`:i.m�l4hl.l.,:e_ Iii.W;:.:f��,1�'k�,�,-a. -z--�_��__._,� �-�� .>[y=� f� � -�:-,,yt�'�I�A .•✓Lvl�fnRrir.�sl„�,'.vhr'r,�:Y�l�-.r /i,h�Yz•�t: [rr:4iu`,o�n!, '+vim-! ,�3 zG,,,�!1=- .fv�r rF •� 15071 CONDITIONAL130.00 1 II ----------- 130.00 1 11 • - • STAFF REPORT To: Planning Commission Report No.: VII.3 From: Kim Moore-Sykes,Assistant City Manager 06 Date: September 20, 2005 Subject: R-2 Rezoning Request for 3645 Chelmsford Road Date Application Received: July 19,2005 Property Address: 3645 Chelmsford Road Zoning District: R-1 60-Day Expires: 9/19/05; waived as missed 7/19 concept review,extension requested to 60-Day Rule. Scheduled for Public Hearing on 9/20/05; Council action on 9/27/05. Spoke with petitioner via phone on 7/26/05. Requested Action: Staff is asking the Planning Commission to consider a request by Troy Martenson, owner of 3645 Chelmsford Road to rezone this property, from R-1 Single-family Zoning District to R-2 Two-Family Zoning District. Background: Currently, the property is zoned R-1,with an existing single-family structure on the lot. It is a corner lot with a 75' utility easement given to Xcel Energy that goes across the northern portion of the lot. The property adjacent to the east is zoned R-2; the properties directly across 37th Avenue to the north from the subject property are zoned R-4. There have been several attempts to split this lot previously but because of the utility easement, these requests have either been denied by the City or upon discovering the easement, petitioners have cancelled their applications. The current owner also went before the City Council at its June 21St meeting with a petition for an R-3 Townhouse Zoning District rezoning request. The Council denied the request due to concerns about spot zoning. Mr. Martenson is now proposing to submit a rezoning request that would change the current zoning of R-1 to R-2 and presented his concept to the Planning Commission at a concept review at the July 19th Planning Commission meeting. As stated earlier, the property adjacent to the subject property is currently zoned R-2, despite its current structure being used as a single-family residence. The R-2 Zoning District requires that a corner lot have an area of 14,000 SF and 100 feet in width at that building setback line. Based on two different sources,Staff has varying information about the square footage of the subject lot. The plat map that the City receives from Hennepin County shows that the lot is 107' x 220' (23,540 SF) while the information from Hennepin County's web site shows the lot as 107' x 180' (19,260 SF). The enclosed copy of a survey of the lot shows an 18' x 220' roadway easement that mostly accounts for the discrepancy in the square footages. Nevertheless, this lot conforms with the area and width as required by the City's Zoning Ordinance for an R-2 designation. H:\Planning\Staff Reports\2005\092005 Rezone R2 3645 Chelmsford Staff report.doc Attachments: • Petition for Rezoning to R-2 (Dated 7/15/05 See Note Above) • Statement from the Petitioner Supporting Rezoning • Letter from Xcel Energy • Letter from Staff(8/9/05)Advising Petitioner of Waiver to 60-Day Rule • Copy of Survey from Owner • Copies of Proposed Plans • Online Information from Hennepin County Property Division • Copy of Hennepin County Plat Map • Copy of a Letter from Mortgagor HAPlanning\Staff Reports\2005\092005 Rezone R2 3645 Chelmsford Staff report.doc 06/29/2005 12:54 FAX 612 781 9323 CITY OF ST ANTHONY 1002 Date: (] Fee: $225.00 CITY OF ST. ANTHONY VILLAGE Petition for Rezoning Applicant: ► �DYE Phone: h/Z 301��'S3 91 S� Address: ✓ 1� �Zd Status of Applicant (Owner, Buyer, Lessee, etc.): Legal Description of property proopoosed/ for rezoning: Street Address: �� ✓ �(,Vh�rCU Y'� • Presently Zoned: Change Zoning to: 1. Attach a statement to this petition stating why this zoning change is requested. 2. If an entire parcel of land is proposed to be rezoned, submit a map or plat with this petition showing the land proposed to be rezoned and all lands within 350 feet of its boundaries. 3. If a portion of a larger parcel of land is proposed to be rezoned, submit a preliminary plat prepared in accordance with sections 1500.01 throu�g�jaiincluding 1500.03 of the St. Anthony Code of Ordinances with this petition. o w 'ch is included in this packet. Sign f ant Sig&t4 of Ow*r (if different from Applicant) 911- ] ,� t *225 OOC( Chelmsford Rezoning Request Dear City Council, My name is Troy Martenson. I am the owner of 3645 Chelmsford Rd. My wife Trish and I are realtor consultants in the St Anthony/ New Brighton area and have been for almost 10 years now. Along with real estate sales, I am extensively involved in property rehabilitation, remodeling and new construction. The subject property would have qualified for a lot split, but cannot be split due to a large NSP easement. Therefore I have a situation where there is a somewhat run down 1940's single family home on one end of a 107 x 220 lot. I tried rezoning to R3 for a very nice 4 unit building that would have substantially improved the area and was turned down. This is my third and final attempt to rezone this property. I am requesting rezoning from R1 to R2 so I may tear down the existing run down house and build a quality double bungalow type property. The structure would consist of two one level homes with 2 car garages, quality built and in good taste. In my experience, I am finding more and more 55+ people looking for low maintenance, 1 level living. This plan would cater to our aging community. This is a mixed use area with all types of zoning around it. This would be a perfect lot for R2 zoning and would certainly not be spot zoning. There would also be a great tax advantage for the city if a structure like this was built. Property taxes would double from the current annual taxation of approximately $1300. Thank you for your consideration, Troy Martenson Martenson Mannor The idea of this project would be to have a four unit building modeled after the one on 33rd and Stinson. It would cater to the 55+ community in St Anthony due to the floor plan. Because the lot on Chelmsford is so large, we could make each unit in this building 24 x 45 equaling 1050 square feet all on one level. 3 bedroom, 2 bath units with a 2 car tuck under garage. This project would benefit the city in many ways. Currently there is an old not so good looking "farm house" on a huge lot that cannot be split only because of a large NSP easement. This would significantly improve the neighborhood setting. It would also be a significant tax increase for the city and there are multi family and mixed use buildings on the north side of 37th, so the plan would fit in perfectly. Thank you for your consideration on this matter. Troy Martenson Martenson Enterprises Thursday 02 of Jun 2005, Xcel Energy ->6514846 6 Page 2 of 4 Xcel Energy NORTHERN STATES POWER 414 NICOLLET MAL]„7TH FLOOR MMNE4POUS,MN 55401 June 2, 2005 Mr. Troy Martenson 3645 Chelmsford Rd. N. St. Anthony, MN 55112 RESIDENTIAL DRIVEWAY ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT 3645 Chelmsford Rd. N., St. Anthony, MN 55112 Stearns County Dear Troy: Our Transmission Engineers have reviewed the driveway encroachment request your submitted and has determined that the encroachment is acceptable to Xcel Energy under the following conditions: (1) Excavation close to structure location. A minimum distance of 15 feet of supported earth must be maintained from any part of the power pole. Support of the ground beyond the 15 feet may be provided by a slope no greater than three feet horizontal to one foot vertical. Support may also be provided by the use of cribbing, sheet piling, retaining wall or tunneluig. The specific plan for providing the required support and the excavation plan for the proposed project must be submitted to Xcel Energy for review and approval. (2) Grade change around structure location. Fill around or above power poles or metal tower foundations is not permitted. The grade around the power poles or metal tower must provide for surface water runoff—no surface water ponding around power poles or metal tower will be permitted. Any cost related to the adjustment of Xcel Energy's facilities will be at the requestor's expense. (3) Fill and grade change around guy wires and anchors. Fill above the steel anchor rod onto the guy wire is not permitted. The specific plan for any grade change or excavation in the vicinity of down guys and anchors must be submitted to Xcel Energy for review and approval. Page 1 of 3 Thursday 02 of Jun 2005 , Xcel Energy ->6514846376 Page 3 of 4 Page 2 June 2, 2005 (4) Grade change within easement. The ground elevation within the easement shall not be increased more than 1 foot above the existing grade. Stockpiling of soil and/or material within the easement will not be permitted. (5) Clearances to equipment and workers. A working clearance of 25 feet between the electrical conductors and any cranes or digging equipment used in or near the easement,or a clearance of 25 feet to the physical proximity of workers must be maintained at all times. In addition, any construction near the transmission line(s) shall comply with all OSHA Safety Clearances. If this clearance cannot be maintained, the contractor or developer must arrange for a line outage by calling Xcel Energy's System Control department (Steve Rollin 612/330- 2875). At least two weeks advanced notice must be provided in order to schedule a line outage. There is a fee of approximately $350.00 per day, per outage, for this service This fee must be paid prior to outage. (6) Landscaping within the easement. Detailed plans for landscaping (including light standards) must be submitted to Xcel Energy for review and approval. Generally shorter varieties of trees and shrubs may be considered. If planting is pernitted, the line's voltage and the tree's mature height and the distance from the line must be considered. For maintenance purposes there shall be no planting with 15 feet of structure sites. (7) Buildung on easements. There shall be no permanent or temporary building allowed within the easement area (8) Fuel and refueling on easements. There shall be no fuel tanks stored or refueling of vehicles and equipment within the easement. (9) Fences on easements. If the easement area is fenced, gates must be installed to provide access to Xcel Energy for maintenance purposes. Chain link or other types of fences using metal material and constructed on or near an Xcel Energy easement should be properly grounded. 'Thursday 02 of Jun 2005 , Xcel Energy ->6514846376 Page 4 of 4 Page 3 June 2, 2005 (10) Streetlights and signs on easements. No streetlights, signboards, identification signs or any other type of non-building structure shall be placed withui the easement prior to approval. Detailed plans must be submitted to Xcel Energy for review and approval to verify compliance with electrical code clearances. It is the express condition of this consent that all other terms and conditions of the easement covering this property shall remain in full force and effect. Thank you for your courtesy and cooperation. Sincerely, Edwin 0. Trapp Siting and Land Rights 612-330-6956 1-715-852-5418,fax . "in thou i Ila e Administrative Offices 3301 Silver Lake Road, St. Anthony, Minnesota 55418-1699 (612) 789-8881 FAX (612) 781-9323 August 9, 2005 Mr. Tory Martenson 6715 Meadowlark Court Lino Lakes, MN 55038 Dear Troy: Enclosed please find a receipt for the $225 check that you submitted along with a Petition for Rezoning to rezone your property at 3645 Chelmsford Road, St. Anthony, MN. On July 26, 2005, I spoke with you about the need to reschedule the concept review for your rezoning request that had been scheduled for the July 19th Planning Commission meeting because you were not able to attend. The Planning Commission felt that because you were not available on July 19th to answer their questions, the City needed to reschedule your concept review. By Minnesota statute, the City is required to take action on zoning and land use planning applications within 60 days of acceptance of the application. If the City cannot complete the approval process within 60 days of receipt of your application, by law the City is required to notify the applicant in writing of the need to extend the 60-day period. Because of the need to reschedule your concept review, the City needs to extend this 60- day period to September 28, 2005, by which time the City's Planning Commission will have been able to hold a public hearing on your rezoning petition and the City Council will have met to take action on your rezoning request. The 60-day period for your request would have expired on September 19, 2005 Since the Planning Commission is responsible for holding public hearings at their regularly scheduled monthly meetings, the next meeting that will meet the statutory requirements for this petition is September 20, 2005. On the following Tuesday, September 27th, the City Council will consider the Planning Commission's recommendation for action on your rezoning request and the Council's action will produce a final disposition of your request that evening. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact me at City Hall, 612-782-3312 or via e-mail, kmoore e,ci.saint-anthony.mn.us. H:\Letters\Planning\2005\080905 Martenson Acknowledgment Letter.doc Sincerely, oore-Sykes Assistant City Manager H.\Letters\Planning\2005\080905 Martenson Acknowledgment Letter.doc .^ - ,�' L+•.1.;• 1`�x'.M-r:i��.`.r-` � ,LLf�i'"�< ,r ' .. .�� %s-r�;7•:I3•'.S'L - tri r a, .f?•-' �''t�' �:. :t,:. .r. :j �. r' }, r'r ' '.^..:��r � ` f? - �='�6t''rx�', � �''`�"+`Q�'" s�r� "�1 .. , r,• �F+.._. L; _ ._i,+ ��.+:.�•,�riy.z;�•� a r; I:)iy •j,'q,l;a` >v- i i„�:,•'-_t: ,!. ''�_'_ :,',:' _ 7, `1 7`+` `''t rhe;' • •�'�'Jk '''� - �,,, .p „` -: - _ .;rt 'trf� �' �r'S. � z5 f�fi��,•'�a��V F1JS Ft v rr` 1J dL`' .rr... __ - - - _ °•• f. 1 �+r• �'j,"F „�' - 7{ d,.- `.f '{:,• "�' _ iYb 41 1.3- '.E,.q ,•a�,irf _ •'l ' 1r -. _1 '};. V �.- .4 {. _ _ - i''� i '�:_ .•�t °' - ..,. --;e+ � �� 1 t }' C!�_ ''cA`�,, - ''J't'-1' +P” 'r:r •'� "i r r..%��"��"5�"u' tF: • _,,�_{,' _. ,. 1 .-i}` - `ti .Vii, ' - -' ~•�'r7, - ::�f 1}{ 'a,. 7' ,,�•.. -.,'�may;.;., y; a:f) -r ',•r^ � )-�+ �.�F;i� .A•'E it L Y' •'J'�.,;t� R{r r" 'i� _ .;:r- _'',..: - 4r - ,r• t rt.•{r,_ ,•r�. ;:;4 ,t+ .� h! 'F.v ��:T:, ,Irl,r ¢yw -3 '-'L i, �f:,j'� `r, ,"�'{/p!>✓'�'` ' "x1„1 ` `i• ., .3w;.4• r}i, �'r 1`,: .�,,`� N' '•,� ,9," _ -1j, .1' � WRy_',`'., 5a? .4�1j,L9 j>F ,1fs 4:7 • ..i• —ri"' ;�. 4� 'r :+{t `' ..45 '2,N � t1! �> F"E: f - Vi:� Y'}, I,.f. �• ,...:y�' �'r" �c r{i ATL .ft "'' ' `,F•:`i' - +"k: ay. _ r- Ch` -y.••e•.a:C.' r. �,t:-s„t -A't ..�:Sltt •��F `'�� r� ,'e �- ;I :;3';\• Ni' -rte' 3�i>' :,4F �'-`-F'e'y X41 ,j•:i-`,r�-�� •i' L,��'"1-' 1 ` o-l'TAc F - �"r-^`+3'�1-�v -` 'K" r.c” .;1;, •7' J:'r< a.}✓ - 'a;'S'f":Y'..q; iib �. -r" ;• ,•�,�•-`} M-•'' _ilrh.'! =F'' 1,,... .'i:> •.i.;"l.r,; c'y, .'e' :.'y^ fi.'w`�`<al t,u, '7�' ,'�:' '4�rt�,i�i'-e �+�' �" - �, '�� _':��v��'':��,--,•�yyt .> +�,r,�LL•:-�-f�;✓;,; �'�i:r,-`;: ';'�''; �- ��` rn•t ''�`��i:':�. � ;.` + ` 34�_' .,�5„-' �: - ft'rat -�,. .•T.; - �.l•l •"`6„r "'.:i<!•",•<�A.''�r�,r i- {�.:a,y•.- - _ •`'.� �_':-t. 'i `fir,.•>+s�,a,` `t'r:,.'�•1.': ,� .`�'� -- �`t.,ti��,:.{gO,J�}-*,a�. _ .+ e .i�9� ., `�f'i^3. a?r R4�• r��.� - - "•t,,:��?'�i'3x ,-i''• '� 4" tr L:'-_ __•': - 'r ,d' �•. xs g.;�}-, ¢� ::' _,9; ;, �y • '`•�'C'�''a>".-r^c,F.. "-ti:;aii'':+•�t _,3�5.vri a;y Wali 'Q=� •i'''ii;. rkU...- ',}' �}—T ;kl i. � ',s }- '1' x �'.�r. 'T s.t^"7 _ f- i-�. •••� °.c�w1t C`y' r ,�t "��*1 '9• ys ''�� - - �r:i"s�.i `a,t,•. x;;�;: Q:ti `'Iij�^`-�?' S vL�' ,�Tb '�'' �;� r �' ,f., ;��- ,,^j''�.�`.r�y1 - t",x;• f',;"- �'��,�, r%� R�,-):•,i�. .{ •,<... ;er,� ,.,i r�...�., '^ire e`it^�d,'-ri r�..- �' d• ti, +:Y, .��.< .f•,<- � r �±; kli:. _ �xc `l'S;, ..Fa "t•rh - -W Jii;s,. 3'y'F-':- - .y+ ;;,,„_t, ��:. :,h."'iP;r`, ,Q "t•.�,�:y�. '• .� r 1�',�k`•..raj. y SQ '1'. _ pr ''t; _ _i a .'1UL�+�-,�' p-P,•�,,;r, 1" ),5 ._��'—N ' •ti, _ ,i'..Y' -- +-• _ - - '•�'•e�3'�x.' y`.•fi _?_ _ •tl,i'.`1�J 1'^f.. ,��•• l T_fi.:•f} S .a9 _- {• '+ ,{ _ -P' ,r'e. � ,�;,' :�, �• ,,.,:;a<+- ?`i'-�-_+,t•,_rr`,yr. .S�i,.:J1'.A,{��G#�:�- "�'v' • ', ,• �r.- Z:r W.' �- `�•• �::..:W�tlr '�_ '+F� •T ig.35nr+:h)� r '�::; }:�;,, _ `'. a_ 'hi �•I�' err== '� + ;�;�!�• :�,. .._a �4 J��1�. 1 :';i'-`r�P.+ - .'r'f - '?i' '•,-7'�'. - �t` ,�.-i.- <;ci�:s•:- J _•7; ��'f1. , kt .. ,. - ��'+{' r `'G.`,'`,? ':. ,,` _ .il.:' ,:i.p' ,•LTi � .A u* �, ''�,.; y '� Uf Mau 1. .4�•: i 't!r •^4 � "5w1 427.:H`d ,, 7�'.4' ; �„S-`:i4, • :�'"Y;ry' ,.c: •i•' „�.�: ..#e,4i..r.5.•�•�,�fs'i.:. ,, ,p F1''-�'):w is.,' ��,Se -`•;:x:�r ” ,- _ _ t !.i•')-'K y•__ - -. `�•.l` l.r,•{t-i L 'A• , 1 ti�J•?: ,,4i.i•�i' _ .M1' �i+tt��tr'. ,_ _ Y ___ .I;T.4�•'J�'..;. k ,i..��t,a `�'a\> s t• "F'y t'7�,y ],��''.'e-" �-h 0.r Y,`' a '�:�•' - }'�. ''l gr' •j}•- t�,1:-�:' ;F_-�4 { � d 1 ``` _ .a'i..5,�„r )f ,�''"+y"„� �- 1r±, .T - - - 'i S-"`S• ",i4 `1{'d '>u i, Y'' _ _ti-. 1, ,�;; - °2"- �,x��M1e^ -*q:r� 5 • - - ., .,y,",a- _- rf _ - F..•. -,rY -Z;r�'�, y A,;,�r t y.�lylr`�P•-k�•, ' :,�� ^��?` - Y;;� ��-a ,r =r,1; •'�S 4i' i %:+r�,i�l f`}_ y}.s':.•i l'i{«.,i ry;,r . _ :iV - i•-.:Y�r - 3`•`.byy. v.1� .:moi' h,C�., i�';i �'l'n' •v I' . �t�/`�,',t.`.' -'�r_�,�., 1 --•t:"�:Y L'• �7 °`�'t �d,f, Q _`�,�•• ,(�,`'�!• pis �' �j..e r2rt5t-e^”.+�y iii _- .. •1 t''r :f: :�'"� :}.1'51,*u��p�_L^}a L.�'' �- `�:F- Vit; .�p'��,�(��,•xY+'�e> `w"7 _ •. - _. _ _ }, t �'y.•, � •rs�,,��;,i�:; nF r'::,c r�.`l: `1 x,M1�;�:'(,.x' %+'S,�r„v •, "- - , 's:' _ xr•:{: `x, - qt�kap s'•�'i* �}i.2-,.1. '"u�.� 'f..c':-YY , r'S'a-,`3.^ ' . ,.,.,y .if', •�•s l r'Y ,i{ 9 '� r`f'�.. 5 > _ ` .. tom; ;' r :-s. - `9y'�•`A4•+' „ ,�;, � `�i,: ��i -r-- •��=��53•�a'� e_�: •tet c., +..• - fF` _ AT < p�5 H,_•.: ,rzg +��•�. �:;" •l - - .. ;, i. `'Y`:•r,� '}K`:?�,;::��..', � 'rY•ly.` ''itY, �1 ,N: ,.� :�µ'"a�: - .;' - (( .tr,; tet.'=>•R_- ��, .y:,5°`„ "7'•"> 3k�' ".r.- ;:�r, - No�. , �.�,'A`hf.�`i-..'^ - $,•- 'il, .h t- +y c}`r` ;!...__, is�'•2''y�„r�rSr== r^ '-r"gyp`. - � _ a g` _ �'>,'T _ _ "*z."- - •s';h,�'-'�•~ t 31' wi, ,s>"M�`;av�S '.•r"�iFiri .,i,�c�xT' r*x L*r't ,�N FP:' :a:. ''!'� 'rte• �rPs.'..,v�• - ,1"�'♦ .,a�"r'a i'n1.•�'-,a,,Illi x-la.y�i Cl ':J-':i,Y. ' �d ' a•- Yf��-:f:"s' ~ _A;'3S -�v.a'1,�_ ':I _ - "4'-:r-,�r,'_,=rt"„v:;-. {. ''>\; ".�;; ,P;: .fir. 44,�.,�, �;'>,:�?i.-"� Pc' •!� '1��;C y',a ,•t._ „fix"-_, } �.�5� ••1'',+-, �°��%? ' - - :�r�{-ey�':.y�,_ M. ;",;,<Ik�„ r<• a�Y`s *'7--i%A4^ a!; � nt .r-f ::'Y x,1•'`9' -`fa,t.._r;r ._F i..ti,.,. �: u � ' _ �� •�?>, f.*"��:�x.� 'r,�” 4 -'n - i; .4y,, .:,,�' `:• _7.�v�J"t��'J'.,.�, pKiy_ k+', {�`�. x. _> :t'•t ,., - t, .°;l..a i..'„� C•d,'.*ir. Ssti`x,•,+.ck��:.N'i��o-,.t' .� �' ”' '�.''t' sE„� b.. '�• •y, .. .,ty�,,SCC ♦fix nY `, r c: + '.�,.,., ;�., xy,'° _.YYvr .t_.!`.'`^ +4?T•y � •'1.5:•r7. �AFP i91 `,v fN`3y. itj•'” r .�.^,�.?'a,��r{1:Y r•' A�, �. it� `F�..,. �•'.-ir;,rY r� 1 fv' .r 6+bvd,3+'::c:�••�+`�s1Y t:at?4 y �,:.'41 ' t =.:i'',r,> 'as^'r,a `Y' F•- i;J"' f' �1�4"Sa.�n'i...`g'�-rri`•� ' �,r�,i .y�•' fn-1°790 LOMAHCO Rg7F VERS Rmf LINE I- "- SELL•�qL SiINGL6S �� \\, 2-#750 LoMANCO ROO; VEK% I2"WP.IZ, IIARDBORD SIDING li" HDRR. HARDBOARD SIDWG RE PR EL�VAjIoN- 1/8'=I'-p'I Lr-F'( SIDE RIGHT' $IDE SIMILAR IZ _ Ix� ITZIM CADS HOR(Z, HARDUDpgp SIDIN[a L 8°x8" � 2xg -fitlM t3D, WOOD GDC, 2z'-ol.11, —Ill 7�d' !v`-o" - II�O" 6_O" T 5'-01, II'0• --- �o" .O• O" G G � OPTIONAL - P°RaH s Eli $E p M o _ Q SUSSES d (aIRDEIC TRUSS Paflo D D bS, PATro DR. in 4 S ° rR — — n sMoKt — — N A , -N rET. oI�NG I KI of O O o 10'-4° z 3Cg o U O I h) N I scuTTI-e ya OUB r O O v 16 e I I ti 7jt[p STuv WAw ,o - FUY_ RAIL C1 z L D I R• Pns7s iA I ;L J � N M I 1 IN& a --- 1 :9 RFLP o SuNKeO Ray- - SHMT (Aftdt -ROSS I S II A A II N G GE '21Y __-4 I I I N J' C-MC. FL04L _gig9x9 Po T- W-auT I—ITO -4 4- LINE OF — I-x _o OA Dix, I ad RmF ale-Rilme. I I o WINDOW DUt 41EADER VET CS, I ¢ AND GENERA NOTES. APPEAR FIBS ill EXT, MALI SN A�uN4 II 1-0Ir -0Y 2�i IZ�OY --- ��e• 1��/• IZ'•�• Z-�O" -0• !�1lM14AI'- 1 I�' 21'rl e 101 Z 17„ 14'AY J _ o - LI % - N T -- II JI i . I II SX2o CeNG. FTG. I I k II r .IL _ I-II I 3_yxi0 W' PLY' 11 vh " coN c FLnDK ��1 1I e� II LSI - x 26 x le ax post oN I I I U r — �I✓I L cwc. arc.. 2�x26xI4 I� il� L 1_ _r+ I T -T cora Fra. 1 — — LT. wcA1N wDeTL I x�gPLY � — o �i N ° FLUE I \ / \ / \ I :I0 J N o axo 2x4 Tuo - /Sv70ffG 1-- 1 n A2T x _ RAI�UNG I o '�I�' sMOICc I r �JSFL°°TCN \ \ I I \ .� P�IMETER I I ABOVE INSUL, V'• CA a�� I ��' p SIT P N (�E Ul SToQs NE((E I I L b9L,SIN[+CE �r ATE 2rPLAT ln ?� IERIME I c.-4" 9LK. F$LIMET N4irc L INSUL ( 9 11 c.-lo" stop — I i %-ps HERE i I b Strzo c°NG�Ff6; gl Y m I ---j�� -- �---.- 14'.0" 5- t•�� . AI 7a:o" YY r s'w�.rr ,K��, tv'a`p�..r :`'y, / h 5•: f ,. ''•V k'./ 'r1'i �, ` A• -� i °y�•4 �;�. /ice�r y, ,^" 1�•'.t + .Jig ,� ''R a'•<. ,�j rr •� A ,tet r ,.�/ /� 11 > F'�,�ifY� ,t:'E' } t I t � x'''I /,y��Ay ) � �'i•. d°7 C1 .� -,w 'FT A:;•r,.✓ r' i F. �' k �,' ,r .,�aA`•i>Y s.� .y y�. ; .' ��" ir �.) � {'� .t a. �"..rU�s, � '34 r.. � 'A �. .'r � •,.�-�r �.1.� ,yE r ,r�(y 'i �i�iy R �(, ';�� E� '� ir� 13r,+i1'��^�'R:. ' r'ft' w�'P"i�*Ew 'r,„T.".w ,'N E '1 al 'e3 t!"p'`',' `�t'•'P•.f:4� •t. " '• »*''TL �•s ! ?'; _ µ.rd iy e r1''gl F Ij .4 y r r k9 of Ny! � I'«,: 1r i. Ito Y!' Q " •. ) ..'"r+�°4� .a� 4� ,�'- t "-J"..�I�'E ";! r. }:•)�i�. £�' ]/ � �•. +� � f p>•.�� r. ( e'S° 4� •'}t,a.t,.: ,ri i,, I Rr f��'. .� �µ i „rit1. � �; � � ��ii,Jv a =�pdr�rrdr'i!! ;°n�7 ''��. �3't i �.1�7+ f 'Z 1 •� '4.r .•tl, er ,i' .��'41' d� - a lFy 7:' _ ly ,rt!R!''i'i iF, 4L %LL,., q ?7 Ow— � k ��ryy�•A fi P,# � a: ,p L'At"41•,'/�,',��V M1 -yxt�r«` ^#I.N;yT�r �','ti �i,.� � .r`� 's� :w ..4': �'�) I,f', 0 .T !>•'�{'hjk "`•j• J. � �t�,, � �r F.. + :': "rk.. its Y�y�'7 ?�,/ . !`�' r� .7. b' 'i!. '� '.•i 7 ry'''4:,' trrll�'> 1d' .1.,y 1)�ryry...///ppp___��-�,� L 'F .� r�.�t .,fy l�iG , i ',. yA NQS' _e 4`..#ti j :,� ,E ,�,•. ,•r,•t�. AR'' „y�6, 'jA•�a. Ae �y�•,)•Q1M" r. Aq _ t,7N ft '•• .li!' ,il'r, o�¢r "�1Z .- r1r y .t Ir wrt yr�.;''F>�>64 i cTj`^.'• '4 '�CTr �4 .V' ?'r '�•14p►..' ,J �'•" ( ' ' `�I� , 7 r.. i, M'I vr4��'�,'iY'd, r - d¢ Y°�•��•�� ','�r�'► ''Y.,4��'Ma"'`4�vit'f � •;S M rel!� �n�b'' ' �:t ��!r'd �,�y �, ��, .9 6`� �`. �' � t'y ty a"iib !• r �'�� f�?I� �ic �'� ,.,,/'� .J�e�. , ��" Y`�T '•.,4 ' r i '` .,gyp dL ♦n ` .k"I 7f0 . a :Lid>ty ( 1 ni' e:r��t�I.LI,.>� _ �•. t �� /Cf1r it r � K , y ,r r ` ,.g,y �r L'E1r,A fr�p..�yt.w.: S/ ycri.. �'. 5 S r Fye t� ��r ��f .a:7 F Itrt� •f� P: • � Ij ?�� K'"'4'r� r ns%t s� r i� •w �''M yt i t L! s>=r pU- •t �l✓g' ` �. - rd 3 + 4 2ti' I ffi� k 'y' at • k� 1 f ..� y s.,yf, t. ,.J.� ,w, ' r, C� S~ ..• 1 rµ iy 1, •; } ♦,;rt." ~ t �V ke+7s �t -y a. �.'�"y'y1' b> �'A •"i� °l 't"•4% ,•� .. fy r ` r as k�rty a 1 .r. r S' s D F, �•' �� f�• q K �f e;,.a,,.:. 3 ,'e"r, � r d�.-:. 4 't .�$"�-5-,�i-t 5r+..�+ � �1��.5"�t i•F'!�"' ��•..e ,i�yf�':,w e��'��r � R ' .�• , .::»si.�,+�++w .,'"4•L>fi'so" �:4��` .Lts9�T��r:,d � -- �'I` ,..,�:.3uGdratltY�t% rat.�at.�$,�r �v, het? L,R. r s � ��,�, �r,�".�� '::�•��'�'�.,:�i't�"� , - t ! ' � � ' x � 3 — a Mfr' '�a� :',• ,,`3� s`;,;+`�.r�� •i,�, ,.,�:. OW F r •. .'' �. e,r��+a -,.. P .r�P !'� � F�$ }�s !'� � ,fit ' I`,;,s ttr .� y.c-4yt S 7 :E� r i~�,.F�s'�A xtE'• ,�rr4Ae x r� - r ,f: `h.. .�'-11PA.;` .,'` %t!'}-;�i f� a +�"} •ar.'t '. !f,r.,, c r 4,. J f�_ v :, � :fit` {'(ir1� t'.. Nf+ .p uS�. �::.ts, �t i,��•t 6_.T: , IN •S,e �h _ ,t' }id: �'T yf f C•i Y .( f -i rs_..F �, T�(.. ;a- v t pry .. s - T-� a �` h. �, r~ 7x .vi ,�,�.P,•`k� .5 r t t. � ; , „ z' � ip•3'". } ;:;.,t a rs.� -a.�}��.�'�"�3 v�{�r�i w�, �. ,_ Son � K.�yt fl'•� &t,ty � .�. - ', _ t .." sy.. {� a��,Kd,✓ r t �`-� ''S°'irx� �,�`St 0 .r x�� - ti 9r� �+�'t�r 3,,•4 '< � � r ` �x`��' ��", �?'S�� *t� �r. iii` R '..i �� • s��s W 'tf, �c '� t t rl. OL �•.� ,5 j, "q,4��gy�.4 •s92i',.. ; Tatr_ f � � �,e .'fir, ,�s�' �'rt�`t'. k ,�� ;>• f ��';.F t�;�` �` r -•`�'` ,Ha-. s t • 2 t 3 v;:�ti =r ry r, [{`�.:,• rr a.� ti �4t3. � i..,, t="�',�tr �� •, r � _ 4,ty - `ti:� � ,� gym; W ,. '" _ Jy, �1 f: �`� f , '�� ,,I �`� � � � �. �� `� ,, �� ;` l � �, � �1 .� 'i c� � o �, `� a � _ � � �� U ��'� � � � ' 1( � I' � � i ``\ ' ' I ,, ,,. � -� ` 1 � .� � � �� , �� Pi i � i l� �r 2422 Enterpr * ® Mendota Heig PIONEE LAND SURVEYORS a CIVIL ENGINEERS (651) 681- @r1gIr1Ce8P1ng LAND PLANNERS * LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS 625 Highway Blaine. MN 5 * * (763) 783• Description Sketch for: TR® Y MARTENS ON- House Address: 3645 Chelmsford Road N89°31'12"E -North line of the NE 1/4 of Sec. 6 107.00 ' , 37TH AVE. NE (CO. RD. g 40.00 foot Roadway Easement g Per Doc. No. 4901042 0 WH - - - - - -- - - - - - - --, - - _ — -- SET P -- 1_ i FMD IP 3' Wood Fence—�— ��__ - - -----------------�--- -- —�- - -- ` g 4 I Centerline of a 75.00 foot NSP I Easement per Doc. No. 1675929 VIE I (4 Overhead Lines) WF e I W aS n W C-4 W e— N i N — - - - — N�—� - - IQ > N Y = - - - -- -_— ' No I C) �' IS O r'� W I r I0 = �` V- . I E;GE g M o �arfngs shown are assumed I � � _ m I QD w p o r � 1 '+' W U m ° 0 m I -- m n o a cri I W ' i ' I N89°31'12"E 107 0, _ �� 6' WFenn -- South Fen `- South line of rintdetails. s V1 p J p �Olk j PQ1P11+y Pagel of 2 Parcel Data for Taxes Payable 2005 Property ID: 06-029-23-11-0004 Address: 3645 CHELMSFORD RD Municipality: ST. ANTHONY School Dist: 282 Construction year: 1920 Watershed: 5 Approx. Parcel Size: 107 X 180 Sewer Dist: Owner Name: T A MARTENSON/T M MARTENSON r�� `,?(p0 54- Taxpayer Name TROY &TRICIA MARTENSON &Address: 3645 CHELMSFORD RD ST. ANTHONY MN 55418 Most Current Sales Information Sales prices are reported as listed on the Certificate of Real Estate Value and are not warranted to i arms-length transactions. Sale Date: April, 2002 Sale Price: $145,000 Transaction Type: Other - See Certificate of Real Estate Value (CRV) Tax Parcel Description Addition Name: UNPLATTED 06 029 23 Lot: Block: Metes & Bounds: THE N 220 FT OF W 107 FT OF THE EAST 960.6 FT OF NE 1/4 EXCEPT ROAD Abstract or Torrens: ABSTRACT Value and Tax Summary for Taxes Payable 2005 Values Established by Assessor as of January 2, 2004 Estimated Market Value: $154,000 Limited Market Value: $119,800 Taxable Market Value: $119,800 Total Improvement Amount: Total Net Tax: $1,692.34 Total Special Assessments: Solid Waste Fee: $19.10 Total Tax: $1,711.44 Property Information Detail for Taxes Payable 2005 Values Established by Assessor as of January 2, 2004 Values: Land Market $76,000 Building Market $78,000 Machinery Market Total Market: $154,000 Land Limited $59,100 Building Limited $60,700 L.t+....//.,..,.,,,7 ..., L.o.�,-,or.;,-. ...n „c•�r.inolr,r;n4�a*oi�c ;�„�n;,�-n�m4�zi innna �/�1/�flfl5 l J 282 DOC NO o DOC NO I DOC NO 1 t578174 �' IQ 4901042 — QI 4893250 QI � /�_ , I 600.6 - - - - -- - -- _ _ r tie --- - 107 -_ .. �- -- - - - - - -1--__ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ __ DOC NO 4955484 --- 84 35 - db kla 14 13 3) (29) � n o N N N N (4) in (3) 84 0 `O 107 85 s 84 c ° (5) � (2) 16 v 192 > _ (34ui ) _ co 64I I I 1 480.3 u, I 16 Lo 1 = .1 u. 1 77 84 480.3 .J o —4 1 9 85 0 (7) •.I OI 1 16 1(1 I = _ I (21) 1 1 I 95 35 480.3 1 80 -- tb 1 7 6 75.3 N_ 15 _^ � I ,_n 2 3 UO 5 6 (12) (106) (107) (108) (109) _ (IIU) u) (III) 1 0 1 lo 1 80 76 76 76 76 76 75.3 0 N E 95 •35 25 83 93 be be 80 i 2 2 � 7T � 79 - I , Ln N •A 1 p vi 3 4 = 5 u, I 6 7 n 1 (71) (72) (73) (74) (75) _ (76) _ (77) (78) I 1 1 1 II 95 I 83r' 83 821. "82 82 I 87 ,- www.adelphimortgage.com June 15, 2005 St. Anthony City Board Members 3301 Silver Lake Road St. Anthony. MN 55418 RE: Troy Martenson Martenson Properties 3645 Chelmsford Road St. Anthony, MN 55418 To Whom It May Concern: This letter is to confirm the approval of funding available to Troy Martenson for the proposed project at the above referenced property. Martenson Properties financial ability to complete the project is solid. I have worked with Troy Martenson and Martenson Properties on many home improvement projects in the last five years. He has been an excellent client and the quality of work he has done to improve his properties is outstanding. Please call me with any questions or concerns at 651-628-4999. Sincerely, Douglas C. Milkowski President Adelphi Mortgage Corporation 2233 HAMLINE AVENUE NORTH•SUITE 615• ROSEVILLE,MINNESOTA 55113 telephone 651.6z8.4999 -facsimile 651.6z8.4988• e-mail.info @adelphimortgage com 2422 Enterprise y (Mendota Height; 7C` PIONEER LAND SURVEYORS e CIVIL ENGINEERS `6rJ1) 651-1� �11g1e'1E'iPrl'�t1 LAND PLANNERS • LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS 625 Highway 1C Blaine. MN 554: * * (763) 783-1 Description Sketch for. TROY MARTENS�N House Address: 3645 Chelmsford Road N89°31 X12"E -North line of the NE 1/4 of Sec. 6 ; / 107.00 37TH AVE. NE ((CO. RD. ' � Co.g 40.00 foot Roodwoy Easement 0 g Per Doc. No. 4901042 0 MD 71PsET r3, wool Fence I I I I 0 r C! Centerline of a 75.00 foot NSP _� o F I I Easement per Doc. No. 1675929 �o (4 Overhead Lines) W � 4 N (V + O M I - - - - - - - - -,�- -'�_- - NL 9) O N - - — NC IO N STAFF REPORT To: Planning Commission &4> Report No.: VII.4 From: Kim Moore-Sykes, Assistant City Manager Date: September 20,2005 Subject: Proposed Text Amendment to the City Code to Allow Egress Windows Wells Encroach into Side Yard Setback Date Application Received: Administrative Property Address: NA Zoning District: R-1, R-1A; R-2 60-Day Expires: NA Requested Action: Consider proposed text amendment to the City's Zoning Code to allow egress window wells as encroachment no more than 3 feet into the side yard or front yard setback. Background: By omission from the St. Anthony Zoning Code, egress window wells are not a permitted use or allowed as an encroachment into the side yard setback of the R-1 Zoning District. Section 1600.03 Uses Not Specified states that if a use is not specifically permitted,permitted by conditional use permit or prohibited,the use will be considered prohibited; and Section 1650.03 Encroachments in Yards, does not include egress window wells as an allowed encroachment. This summer,Staff has received many requests to be allowed to install egress window wells in setbacks. In many situations, the yard generally is sufficient to allow for this installation without going into the setback, side yard or front yard. And in these situations, the Building Inspector and Fire Marshall would oversee the installation to ensure proper placement and dimensions as required by the building code. All the cities that responded to Staff's requests for information indicated that they do not have anything in their zoning ordinances that specifically address egress windows in the setback because itis more of a safety issue. As such,egress window wells are mostly allowed by their city's policy, and usually without the zoning department's consideration. All stated that building permits are required for egress window wells construction so that Building Inspector and Fire Marshall can review the building plans. The cities of Minneapolis,St. Paul, Blaine,Hopkins,New Brighton and Lexington have adopted policies that are based on the MN Building Codes for encroachments into the side or front yard for egress window wells. Staff members for Blaine, Lexington and Hopkins have not been able to locate any ordinances that have language that address egress window requirements or restrictions in the setback of a lot. Some cities, like New Brighton, address requests through the building inspections department to install egress windows in the setback on a case-by-case basis. HAPlanning\Staff Reports\2005\09202005 Egress Text Amd to Code.doc In speaking with the planning and zoning departments for the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul, they both indicated that egress window wells are allowed no matter what because it's an issue of safety for both the resident and emergency personnel. St. Paul said that the City Council did have concerns as well about people falling into the wells, so have required fencing around the wells in areas where the setback to the property is narrow. Otherwise, if someone falls into a well and the individual is not the property owner, the individual can be cited for trespassing. Michelle Howard of the Minneapolis Planning and Zoning Department said that they viewed the installation of egress window wells the same as St. Paul. She said that both cities have side yard setbacks on some properties that that are 3 to 4 feet from the property lines and they view egress window wells as always allowable because of the safety issues that they address. Ms. Howard, as did the planner from St. Paul,reported that they have never required properties owners to attend public hearings on their requests to prove hardship or to consider economic gain as an impediment to the allowance and construction of these structures. It is simply a matter of safety and they can be installed without planning and zoning review. This seems to be the same procedure for other cities that Staff contacted. Staff also requested memos form the Building Official and the St. Anthony Fire Department regarding egress window wells. Proposed Text: Consequently,Staff found no ordinance language dealing with egress window wells from other metro communities. Simply adding egress window wells to the already existing ordinance text would be the easiest text amendment: 1650.03 Encroachment in Yards. The following are permitted encroachments in required yards: (i) Any life safety improvement to a residential structure such as egress window wells and/or other similar above grade exiting requirements so long as access to the rear yard is preserved. Construction and installation of an egress window well would still require a building permit. This permit would trigger inspections by the Building Inspector and Fire Marshall,which would provide oversight and control over the construction of an egress window well in the setback. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission and the City Council approve the text amendment that allows the construction and installation of any life safety improvement to a residential structure. Expert consideration for these installations should be required from emergency personnel and the building official. Attachments: • City of Hopkins Information on Egress Windows • City of Blaine Policy • City of Roseville Policy • City of Lexington- Encroachment Ordinance • City of Bloomington- Encroachment Ordinance • City of St. Anthony Egress Window Information from Building Inspector • Memo from Greg Schmitt,City Building Official • Memo from John Malenick, Fire Chief HAPlanning\Staff Reports\2005\09202005 Egress Text Amd to Code.doc St Anthony Fire Department Memo To: Mayor,Council and City Manager From: John Malenick, Fire Chief Date: September 9, 2005 Re: Egress Windows I have been asked by the Assistant City Manager to respond to the issue of egress windows as a life saving device. When properly placed and maintained, egress windows are, without a doubt, a valuable tool in the protection of human life. They are currently required in all new construction of all below grade dwellings and are required in any major renovation projects of below grade dwellings. Without egress windows, a single stairway is often the only means of entering and exiting the basement of many St. Anthony homes (one way in, one way out). This is a very potentially dangerous situation not only for the occupants put also for any emergency personnel required to mitigate a below grade problem. Should the sole means of egress become impassible due to fire or structural failure, there would be no other escape and time would become critical to life. Because of this, placement of an egress window is of great concern. To place the egress window in close proximity to the stairway would be impractical in the event a single small fire could block both means of escape. Ideally, the egress window would facilitate the most heavily used room in the basement and be remote from the stairway. They are also required in any below grade bedroom. It is my recommendation that the placement of an egress window be reviewed during the building permitting process by not only our building code official but also our Fire Marshall. Respectfully submitted, John Malenick Fire Chief 0 Page 1 City of Hopkins • inspections • building inspections • winnows I t;gress wtnaows rage i ui j R _ } F i N_ ' • Suilding lin ons -Wind -ftrers.s Vindaws What is an egress window? General Information An egress window is a window that is Installing A Basement Egress Window Building Inspections required in specific locations in a dwelling Complaints and is intended to provide an emergency Construction Debris, means of exiting a dwelling. Egress windows are only required in dwellings.Windows Dumpsters&Storage must meet specific size requirements to qualify as an egress window. Electrical Environmental Health Where are egress windows required? Fire Inspections Egress windows are required in every room used for sleeping purposes(bedrooms)on Mechanical any floor and in basements with habitable space. If you are constructing a new home, Plumbing the code requires that you put an egress window in each bedroom. It also requires an Recommending egress window in the basement if habitable rooms will be finished in the basement. If Contractors g you install a basement bedroom or bedrooms, an egress window is required in each bedroom but you need not provide another egress window if there are other habitable Requesting An Inspection rooms in the basement The bedroom window(s)suffices for the habitable rooms. Resources&Links or Permit f If you have an existing home and you add a sleeping room in an unfinished basement, Applications e for the code requires that you install an egress Window in the sleeping room or rooms. Utility Likewise, if you create habitable space in your basement other than a bedroom and you currently do not have an egress window,the code would require thatyou install one as How To Apply For part of the installation of the habitable room. Permits & Build What are the size requirements for an egress window? Basements An egress window must satisfy four International Residential Code(IRC)criteria. Decks • Minimum width of opening:20 in. Foundations • Minimum height of opening:24 in. Garages • Minimum net clear opening: 5.7 sq. t. (5.0 sq.ft.for ground floor). Roofing • Maximum sill height above floor:44 in. Stairs&Guardrails Windows The window must have a minimum net clear opening of 5.7 sq. ft. Net clear opening [more] refers to the actual free and clear space that exists when the window is open. It is not the rough opening size or the glass panel size, but the actual opening a person can Building Materials crawl through. Common Building Material Characteristics The window opening must be operational from the inside without keys or tools. Bars, FChar Characteristics & grilles and grates may be installed over windows but must be operational without tools Drblocki g& or keys and still allow the minimum clear opening. ng Gypsum Wallboard Do the math [more] At first glance,you might assume that a 20-in.by 24-in.window would be acceptable for egress. However,those dimensions would yield a net clear opening of only 3.3 sq. ft.To Truth-In-Housing achieve the required net clear opening of 5.7 sq.ft.,a 20-in.wide window would have to Before You Buy Or Sell be 42 in. high. Likewise, a 24-in. high window would have to be 34 in.wide. Contractor License Finding a Licensed Evaluator Most Common Repair/Replace Items Property Maintenance Rental License Rental Properties Smoke Detectors 7/20/2005 City of Hopkins •Inspections • Building Inspections • Windows Egress Windows Page 2 of 5 —3 MM RD Download Acrobat Reader. 71 t � - A -TM 00 Vm 11-�7w-fi .01 01 r ,�\ 00/f rt a Nearly all window manufacturers specify which of their windows meet national egress requirements right in their catalogs and list the net free opening of their windows.This should take the guesswork out of selecting a window for you addition or remodeling project Also,the sales person vvho sells you the window should be able to help you select a code compliant window provided that they know you need an egress window. Must i use a special type of window? A wide variety of window designs can be used for egress C � windows.You should select a window design that meets your architectural, aesthetic, space, and financial limitations. Casement windows with hinged sashes that swing free and clear of the opening can be relatively small and still meet egress requirements.This makes them ideal for basement egress and for other areas where space is limited. Some manufacturers can install a special operator arm that allows the window to open wider than the standard operating arm to meet egress requirements. Others have an operator arm that can be pushed to open the window wider in an emergency.These meet egress requirements as long as you leave the "PUSH HERE"label in place. Glider or slider windows have sashes that fill nearly half the possible window opening.They require a window nearly twice the size of a casement window. g g Even when it's fully open, more than half of a double- W" ouble- ;�'�_ hung window's overall area is blocked by glass. This means that to meet egress window height requirements, a window must be nearly 4 ft 9 in. in 1-3]___/_____-3____-/__.._ _.3----- t_..---I rrnnrnnnr City of Hopkins • Inspections • tsuiiaing inspeciions • winuows I vvuiuuvvb overall height. This height requirement makes it undesirable for most basement egress situations. Awning windows are problematic. Since the opened sash prevents escape from most window — wells,they're unsuitable for basement egress. ;yr' And with most awning windows,the center opening hardware and height don't meet egress y requirements. Some manufacturers offer models y with special detachable operators that meet - egress requirements. Why don't my windows meet egress requirements? Some older homes were built before there were any egress window requirements. Many more homes were built when the egress window net free opening size was 5 sq.ft.Yet even newer homes often lack proper egress windows.Attics and basements were often legally remodeled into family rooms or offices (which didn't require egress windows)then later converted into bedrooms (which now do require them).When bedrooms are added to basements without the knowledge of inspectors 6a ' and without the requisite egress window,they - create a dangerous : underground firetrap. 44 During remodeling, homeowners often unwittingly replace large egress windows with . smaller, non-egress 1 windows.And while the code will require egress windows be installed when .• bedrooms are added on, they won't necessarily dictate that windows in existing bedrooms be - enlarged to egress size; - it's simply too difficult toxFu monitor every situation. _ Required or not, egress - windows are crucial lifesaving equipment. If a `b room has even the remote ` possibility of later becoming a bedroom, include an egress size window. Basement Egress Windows Basement egress windows present an added challenge. Besides the height,width and overall square-footage requirements that the window must meet,there are certain requirements for the window well surrounding the window. $ Vlfindowwells must: ISO • Allow the rescue window opening to be fully opened. • Provide 9 sq. ft. of"floor area,"with a minimum dimension of 36 in in width and infttto Seib ' '•. length. 0 $ • Contain a permanently affixed ladder or ." steps for climbing out if the window well depth exceeds 44 inches in depth.The ladder must be at least 12 in.wide and project no less than 3 in. from the window .� r. . well. It can't be obstructed by the open ac window or encroach on the required n-m/;nc?Nart;nnC/hiii1l11:1Q/win(iows/earesswindows.htmI 7/20/2005 City of Hopkins • Inspections • Building Inspections • Windows Egress Windows Page 5 of 5 r S dr Y _ •'�o q a Replacement Windows If you're replacing a smaller window with a larger one that meets egress requirements, bear in mind that enlarging the height of the opening takes less structural work than enlarging the width. Increasing width might mean installing a larger, beefier horizontal structural header over the window opening-a major project. Increasing height is often only a matter of lowering the height of the sill below the window. If you are replacing windows in your home,there are some circumstances whereby you may need to comply with the requirements for egress windows. Please contact the Inspections Office or pick up the handout on replacement windows to determine if these rules will apply to your project. For more information,contact Debbie Sperling at 952-548-6320. City of Hopkins • Inspections • Building Inspections • Windows I t tress winaows rage,+ of o window well dimensions by more than 6 in. ID m r ,IDS R T - -� P a ✓ �; � �."9,M Window wells may be made of rust resistant metal, treated wood,wood naturally resistant to decay, concrete, masonry, or plastic. Some window well designs have steps built or molded into them. If an egress window is located under a deck or porch,the code requires at least 48 inches betv�een the top of the window well and the bottom of the deck or porch joists. Window Well Designs Window wells come in many designs. Following are examples of different designs. Some include ladders. Covers are permitted and shown in the last illustration. ,. ----------- _-__r._ +: /L.,,;17:.,R/,,A"Anix 7c/Pm.-,znuinrinw,, html 7/20/2005 1113V R, iwi . . aresESP sa 1) Check Window Height and Width DOUBLE HUNG SLIDING CASEMENT n F1 E] Is the clear openable height, at least 24 inches? Yes NoF-1 Is the clear o enable width, at least 20 inches? Yes No El 2) Check Window Opening Area (fill in the three blanks) \'u x - Openable height (inches) Openable width (inches) Openable area (square inches) Is the clear o enable area /A-\ at least 720 square inches? Yes No 3) Check the distance from the floor to the bottom of opening Is the distance, � from the floor to the finished sill Yes F No (bottom of opening) 48 inches or less? F1 If you answered yes to all questions then the window should comply with the 2003 Minnesota State Fire Code. For assistance: Minnesota State Fire Marshal Division (651) 215-0500; TTY: (651) 282-6555; firecode@state.mn.us 1) Check Window Height and Width DOUBLE HUNG SLIDING CASEMENT Yes No Is the clear openable height, � at least 24 inches? El El Is the clear openable width, M at least 20 inches? Yes No 2) Check Window Opening Area (fill in the three blanks) L-Fil x Openable height (inches) Openable width (inches) Openable area (square inches) El Is the clear openable arca, a at least 720 square inches? Yes El no 3) Check the distance from the floor to the bottom of opening Is the distance, � from the floor to the finished sill Yes NoF] (bottom of opening) 44 inches or less? If you answered yes to all questions then the window should comply with the 2003 Minnesota State Fire Code. For assistance: Minnesota State Fire Marshal Division (651) 215-0500; TTY: (651) 282-6555; firecode@state.mn.us WE 1) Check Window Height and Width DOUBLE HUNG SLIDING CASEMENT Is the clear openable height, at least 24 inches? Yes F] No Is the clear o enable width, at least 20 inches? Yes No 2) Check Window Opening Area (fill in the three blanks) C\ x - �\ Openable height (inches) Openable width (inches) Openable area (square inches) Is the clear o enable area & at least 820 square inches? Yes El No El- 3) Check the distance from the floor to the bottom of opening Is the distance, from the floor to the finished sill Yes � No (bottom of opening) 44 inches or less? If you answered yes to all questions then the window should comply with the 2003 Minnesota State Fire Code. For assistance: Minnesota State Fire Marshal Division (651) 215-0500; TTY: (651) 282-6555; firecode@state.mn.us r i 1) Check Window Well Dimensions a 0 Is the clear horizontal distance, at least 22 inches? Yes El no El ( o F] Is the clear horizontal distance, L `�J at least as wide as the window? Yes 1:1 No Is the window well large enough to allow the window to be opened fully? Yes No EL 2) Check the vertical depth of the window well If the distance, [0 from the bottom of the well to the D Yes E] No F] top at grade is more than 44 inches, a ladder is required. If a ladder is required, is one provided? If you answered yes to all questions then the window should comply with the 2003 Minnesota State Fire Code For assistance: Minnesota State Fire Marshal Division (651) 215-0500; TTY: (651) 282-6555; firecode@state.mn.us SFMD Fact Sheet INS-FACT-01 March 31,2003 Page 15 of 16 1) Check Window Well Dimensions ED ED Is the clear horizontal distance, at least 36 inches? Yes ❑ No F-1 Is the clear horizontal distance, at least 36 inches? Yes P No F1 Is the clear horizontal distance, ❑ with the window open at least 30 inches? Yes No 2) Check Window Well Opening Area (fill in the three blanks) /R� xa Q� o Horizontal distance (inches) Horizontal distance (inches) Net horizontal opening (square inches) Z�m:@CZ;EauIs the clear o enable area, at least 1,080 s uare inches? Yes ❑ No ❑ 3) Check the vertical depth of the window well If the distance, 1:0 from the bottom of the well to the El top at grade is more than 44 inches, a ladder is required. D Yes No ❑ If a ladder is required is one pro Wed? SFMD Fact Sheet INS- ACT-01 March 31;200 Pae 16 ofJ6 If you answered yes to all questions then the window should comply with the 2003 Minnesota State Fire Code For assistance: Minnesota State Fire Marshal Division (651) 215-0500; TTY: (651) 282-6555; firecode@state.mn.us •J'UL-CO-GYJCJJ 1CJ••-IJ v 1 1 1 .�. ++- +.+� •••v �•"• •`"•• __ __ _ ___ - - _ , City of Blaine Building Inspection Department Policy Guide Category: V: Land use zoxiiiig issues Date: 6/05/03 Code/Ordinance Section: 33:12 Policy Guide: Staff Subject: Egress window well encroachments into side yard setbacks. Background: There have been occasions, due to construction or design constraints; it has been necessary to locate basement egress windows on the side yard wall side of homes. This in turn requires the adjacent window well for the egress window to possibly encroach into a required side yard setback. The question arises is this allowed. Policy: Window wells are required by the State Building Code as an egress avenue. They are typically an at grade construction. They are not required to have guardrails above grade. Due to the inherent safety concerns involved the City of Blaine will allow egress window wells in side yard setbacks that comply with the following conditions: 1. They meet all the requirements of the MN State Building Code. 2. The clear width opening does not project more than 3'6"from the main structure into the side yard setback Duration: Review in 3 years of indefinite Building Official Approval TOTAL P.02 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 2660 Civic Center Drive Roseville,MN 55113 INSPECTION SCHEDULING 651-792-7080 GENERAL INFORMATION 651-792-7084 FAX 651-792-7070 INFO"ATIONREQ UIRED WITHEGRESS WINDOWS Basements in dwelling units and every sleeping room below the fourth story shall have at least one operable window or door approved for emergency escape or rescue which shall open directly into a public street,public alley, yard or exit court. The emergency door or window shall be operable from the inside to provide a full, clear opening without the use of separate tools. GENERAL BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENTS: 1. Escape or rescue windows shall have a minimum net clear openable area of 5.7 square feet. The minimum net clear openable height dimension shall be 24 inches. The minimum net clear openable width dimension shall be 20 inches. 2. When windows are provided as a means of escape or rescue, they shall have a finished sill height not more than 44 inches above the floor. 3. Escape and rescue windows with a finished sill height below the adjacent ground elevation shall have a window well. Window wells at escape or rescue windows shall comply with the following: A. The clear horizontal dimensions shall allow the window to be fully opened and provide a minimum accessible net clear opening of 9 square feet, with a minimum dimension of 36 inches. B, Window wells with a vertical depth of more than 44 inches shall be equipped with an approved permanently affixed ladder or stairs that are accessible with the window in the fully open position. The ladder or stair shall not encroach into the required dimensions of the window well by more than 6 inches. 4. Bars, grilles, grates or similar devices may be installed on emergency escape or rescue windows, doors or window wells, provided: A. The devices are equipped with approved release mechanisms which are openable from the inside without the use of a key or special knowledge or effort. B. The buildingis equipped t with smoke detectors installed in accordance with Section 310.9. *Attached are examples of drawings which may assist you. They are intended as a guide only. 24 HOUR NOTICE IS RECOM1NENDED FOR ALL INSPECTIONS!! \\Viccone\CommDev\Pemits\H=douts\Eg=Window doc 4 ' -A tq am mv Ce ou -nil . 4 09 .L3* � qPA ROMw it � SW la wum Page 1 of 1 Kim Moore-Sykes From: Mike Delmont[lexingtommn@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 9.16 AM To: kmoore@ci.saint-anthony.mn.us Subject: encroachments How's this???????????????????? Subd. 17. Permitted Encroachments - Yards. For the purpose of this Chapter,the following shall be considered as permitted enroachments within the yards indicated: A. In any yard: Overhanging roof eaves, open terraces, marquees, flues, sills, lintels, pilasters, cornices, gutters, open canopies, and awnings attached to the principal building, not to exceed twenty-five percent (25%) of the depth of the front or rear yards or twenty-five percent (25%) of the width of the side yards. Chimneys, flag poles, ornamental features, sidewalks, fences, landscaping, posts, or other similar amenities are permitted encroachments that are not restricted by area, placement, and land use intensity. B. Yard lights and name plate signs in residential districts, provided such lights and signsare three 3 feet or m ( ) ore from all lot lines. Lights for illuminated parking and loading areas or yards for safety and security purposes may be provided where necessary, provided that the glare is not visible from public rights-of-way or adjacent residential property. C. In front yards, balconies may extend a distance of four (4) feet or less, provided they are seven (7) feet or more above the grade at the building line. Patios or decks may extend a distance of eight (8) feet or less. Enclosed entryway not to exceed 64 square feet. D. In rear yards, balconies, breezeways, detached picnic shelters, swimming pools, recreational equipment, landscaping, driveways, steps, stoops, uncovered porches, patios, picnic tables, open arbors, trellises, laundry drying equipment, detached outdoor living room and outdoor eating facilities,provided they are not less than five (5) feet from any lot line. E. Encroachments in any yard that abut a public or private street, shall be considered as permitted encroachments, as outlined above, except that no encroachment shall be permitted within present or proposed street right-of-way lines. F. On corner lots, in any district, encroachments are not permitted in excess of thirty (30) inches above the curb line in a triangular area defined as follows: "Beginning at the intersection of the projected curb line of two intersecting streets, thence thirty (30) feet from the point of beginning on the other curb line, thence to the point of beginning." Subd. 18. Home Occupations. Bloomington City Code Chapter 19 page .3 I MMI .- Preface I I. Charter R. Code SEARCH 11 <Back Forward> II Part II. Code Chapter 19. ZONING Section 19.08. PERMITTED ENCROACHMENTS INTO REQUIRED YARDS AND SETBACK AREAS. (a) General. Except where otherwise regulated by this Code and as established below, all buildings, site features, and equipment shall maintain the setback requirements established for the zoning district in which they are located. (b) Except as prohibited by Chapter 17, Division E of this Code, the site features and equipment listed below shall be permitted to locate in yards and to encroach into required zoning district setbacks to the extent specified in this Section, but in all cases shall maintain the minimum setback indicated. (1) Yards. The established yards of the zoning code and any primary Zoning District. For the purposes of this Section, the terms "front yard", "side yard" and "rear yard" shall have the same meanings as defined in Section 19.03, except that any yard adjacent to a public street shall in all cases be considered a "front"yard for setback purposes unless otherwise specified. (2) Setbacks from Public Streets. All setbacks from public streets or proposed public streets shall be measured from the planned widened rights-of-way in accordance with the Master Street Plan of the City. References to a"front property line" is assumed to denote the planned widened rights-of-way in accordance with the Master Street Plan of the City. (3) Required Setback. Except where otherwise noted, references to "required setback" means the minimum setback required for the principal building in the applicable zoning district. (c) In all zoning districts: (1) Utility poles and wires, water, gas and other public utility appurtenances are permitted at any location in a front, side or rear yard with no minimum setback from any property line. (2) Retaining walls up to four feet in height are permitted at any location in a front yard provided that a front setback of not less than ten feet shall be maintained and at any location in a side or rear yard with no minimum setback from any property line. There shall be no encroachment into public easements of record without the written approval of the Issuing Authority. (3) Steps, stoops and exterior landings are permitted in a front, side or rear yard providing that front, side and rear setbacks of not less than five feet shall be maintained. There shall be no encroachment into public easements of record without the written approval of the Issuing Authority. (4) Private sidewalks are permitted in a front yard without a minimum front setback provided that a side setback of not less than five feet shall be maintained, and a side or rear yard providing that side or rear setbacks of not less than five feet shall be maintained. Private sidewalks shall not encroach into public easements of record without the written approval of the Issuing Authority. (5) Overhanging eaves may encroach up to three feet into a required front, side or rear setback. Where a required setback to a property line is reduced to less than three i-....._ ------ ..: 1..1,.,,..,.,:.....+..,,, — iio/rnrlizlrnrl,�l 9 I html 7/28/2005 Bloomington City Code Chapter 19 page 3 Page 2 of 9 feet by reason of a variance or other approval granted by the City, the allowed eave encroachment shall in no event cross the property line. An overhanging eave may encroach up to six feet into a required front or rear setback when placed over steps, stoops or an exterior landing providing that the encroachment shall not exceed eight feet in width along the wall plane. There shall be no encroachment into public easements of record without the written approval of the Issuing Authority. (6) Underground garages, in accordance with Section 19.64(k)(1), may encroach into any required front, side or rear setback, provided that a front setback of not less than 15 feet and side and rear setbacks of not less than five feet shall be maintained. There shall be no encroachment into public easements of record without the written approval of the Issuing Authority. (7) Antennas and supporting structures, including satellite receiving antennas greater than one (1) meter in diameter in residential districts and greater than two (2) meters in diameter in nonresidential districts, shall not be located within a front yard and shall be located only to the side or rear of the principal structure where side and rear setbacks of no less than ten feet shall be maintained. All antennas and supporting structures, including satellite receiving antennas, shall meet the applicable requirements of Sections 15:14, 19.47 and 19.63.05 of the City Code. There shall be no encroachment into public easements of record without the written approval of the Issuing Authority. (8) Ramps and other devices for access to buildings and sites by disabled persons in compliance with the American Disabilities Act may encroach into any required front, side or rear setback, provided that a front setback of not less than 20 feet and side and rear setbacks of not less than two feet shall be maintained. There shall be no encroachment into public easements of record without the written approval of the Issuing Authority. . (d) In residential zoning districts (R-1A, R-1, RS-1, R-4, RM-12, RM-24 and RM-50): (1) Patios and terraces may encroach ten feet into a required front setback, five feet into a required side setback and 20 feet into a required rear setback, provided that a front setback of not less than 20 feet, a side setback of not less than five feet and a rear setback of not less than ten feet shall be maintained. There shall be no encroachment into public easements of record without the written approval of the Issuing Authority. (2) Open decks and balconies not greater than five feet above grade at any point may encroach ten feet into a required front setback, five feet into a required side setback and 20 feet into a required rear setback, provided that a front setback of not less than 20 feet, a side setback of not less than five feet and a rear setback of not less than ten feet shall be maintained. There shall be no encroachment into-public easements of record without the written approval of the Issuing Authority. (3) Open decks and balconies greater than five feet in height above grade at any point may encroach five feet into a required front setback and ten feet into a required rear setback, provided that a front setback of not less than 25 feet, a rear setback of not less than 20 feet and a side setback of not less than ten feet shall be maintained. Such features are permitted in a side yard provided that a side setback of no less than ten feet shall be maintained. There shall be no encroachment into public easements of record without the written approval of the Issuing Authority. (4) Chimneys may encroach three feet into a required front, side or rear setback, provided that front and rear setbacks of not less than 27 feet and a side setback of not less than seven feet shall be maintained. Chimneys shall not encroach into public easements of record without the written approval of the Issuing Authority. (5) Awnings may encroach three feet into a required front, side or rear setback, provided that front and rear setbacks of not less than 27 feet and a side setback of not less than seven feet shall be maintained. An awning may encroach up to six feet into a required front or rear setback and up to five feet into a required side setback when placed over steps, stoops or an exterior landing, provided that the encroachment shall not exceed eight feet in width along the wall plane and that front and rear setbacks of not less than 24 feet and a side setback of not less than five feet shall be '-u"-- ------- _: ,_,..-------�'--- ----- --_I--J-If,--]-7!N `) ,____, "7/^10/n Ar% Bloomington City Code Chapter 1y page .i 1 ue, J Vl maintained. Awnings shall not encroach into public easements of record without the written approval of the Issuing Authority. (6) Clothes lines and laundry drying equipment are not permitted within the front yard and shall be located only in side and rear yards where side and rear setbacks of not less than five feet shall be maintained. In instances where the side or rear yard abuts a public street, the required setback shall be no less than the required setback for a principal building in the zoning district. These features shall not encroach into public easements of record without the written approval of the Issuing Authority. (7) Arbors and trellises may encroach ten feet into a required front setback, five feet into a required side setback and 20 feet into a required rear setback, provided that a front setback of not less than 20 feet, a side setback of not less than five feet and a rear setback of not less than ten feet shall be maintained. A setback of not less than 20 feet shall be maintained from any public street. These features shall not encroach into public easements of record without the written approval of the Issuing Authority. (8) Permanently installed outdoor fireplaces and barbecues are not permitted within the front yard and shall be located only in side and rear yards. Such features shall not encroach into the required side setbacks and may encroach up to 15 feet into the required rear setback provided that a rear setback of not less than 15 feet shall be maintained. In instahces where the side or rear yard abuts a public street, a setback of not less than the required front setback shall be maintained. Such features shall not encroach into public easements of record without the written approval of the Issuing Authority. (9) Basketball backboards, rims, and support structures may encroach 15 feet into required front and rear setbacks and five feet into a required side setback in the front yard, provided that front and rear setbacks of not less than 15 feet and a side setback in the front yard of not less than five feet shall be maintained. In side and rear yards, side setbacks of not less than 15 feet shall be maintained. Such features may encroach on public easements of record with the written approval of the Issuing Authority. (10) Other recreational equipment and play apparatus over four feet in height are not permitted within the front yard. Such features are permitted in side and rear yards provided that side and rear setbacks of not less than 15 feet shall be maintained, including those instances where the side or rear yard abuts a public street. Such features may encroach on public easements of record with the written approval of the Issuing Authority. (11) Air conditioning equipment may encroach five feet into any required front, side and rear setback, provided that front and rear setbacks of not less than 25 feet and side setbacks of not less than five feet shall be maintained. Air conditioning equipment shall not encroach into public easements of record without written approval of the Issuing Authority. (12) Bay and bow windows may encroach two feet into any required front, side and rear setback, provided that front and rear setbacks of not less than 28 feet and a side setback of not less than eight feet shall be maintained. Such features shall not encroach into public easements of record without written approval of the Issuing Authority. (13) Entry vestibules less than eight feet in width may encroach six feet into any required front and rear setback, provided that front and rear setbacks of not less than 24 feet shall be maintained. No encroachment shall be allowed into a required side setback. Such features shall not encroach into public easements of record. (e) In nonresidential zoning districts: (1) Telephone booths are permitted in any front, side or rear yard, provided that a front setback of not less than 15 feet, a side setback of not less than five feet and a rear setback of not less than that required for the principal building in the zoning district shall be maintained. Telephone booths shall not encroach into public easements of record without written approval of the Issuing Authority. (2) Newspaper boxes are permitted in the front, side and rear yards when the property is occupied by a principal building, provided that a front setback of not less than 15 feet mn 9 3.html 7/28/2005 Thousands of fires occur in residences rescue gear, which may include a breathing each year. Many of these fires occur at apparatus. ' night when the occupants are asleep. The size determined as a minimum for Severe injuries or death can be the escape and rescue is 5.7 square feet of result of these fires if the occupants clear openable area or 5.0 square feet for " are asleep and unaware the fire is in grade floor openings (see Code for detailed progress. Death usually results from informaton). Since windows come all asphyxiation long before the fire reaches the occupants. shapes, a minimum width dimension was needed to accommodate tall,window shapes In order to prevent the tragic loss of and a minimum height dimension for wide life the Minnesota State Building Code window shapes. Studies have determined the requires smoke alarm to be installed in minimum net clearwidth needed is 20 inches. dwellings to alert the occupants of a fire. These dimensions are part of the code The code also requires that sleeping requirements and assure the window or door rooms and habitable space in basement will provide for a safe exit or rescue. dwelling units have windows or doors,' Emergency escape windows and doors must which may be used for emergency be located on the exterior of the building and escape or rescue if the fire has blocked open directly to a yard, street or alley so that the normal, escape routes in the home. the occupants may escape or be rescued Basements pose a special danger since directly from the room to the outside without they usually have only one stairway to having to travel through the building itself, act as a means of escape. This stairway In a fire,time is critical to survival.You may can be easily blocked by fire making not have time to instruct family members escape from the basement impossible. and guests on the proper window operation For this reason the Minnesota Building or to perform complex operations to get the Code requires that if a portion of the window open.The code requires windows basement is habitable space, at least and doors used for emergency escape of one emergency egress window or door is rescue to be readily openable without any provided. special knowledge or effort.The intent is that The size of windows and doors required windows be of the common double-hung, in the code are based on extensive horizontal sliding or casement type.Your local research to determine the proper building inspector will need to be consulted relationships of height and width-of to assist you in evaluating special types of window openings to adequately serve for windows. both rescue and escape. Special windows need to be evaluated based People come in all sizes and windows on the difficulty and knowledge needed for come in all shapes.A fireman attempting operating or removing the windows. a rescue will likely be wearing full Building Codes and Standards Division 408 Metro Square Building 121 East 7th Place St.Paul,MN 55101-2181 651.296.4639 TTY: 800.627.3529 Fax: 651.297.1973 VrWW.mncodes;O`rg BCSD-GIO12 70-04 ESCAPE continued Window wells.Window wells required for emergency escape and rescue shall have horizontal dimensions that allow the door or window of the emergency escape 44 INCHES and rescue openings to be fully opened.The horizontal - dimensions of the window well shall provide a minimum net clear area of 9 square feet(0.84m2)with a minimum horizontal projection and width of 36 inches (914 mm). Exception:The ladder or steps required by Section a R310.2.1 shall be permitted to encroach a maximum of , 6 inches (152 mm)into the required dimensions of the window well. Bulkhead enclosures. Bulkhead enclosures shall provide direct access to the basement.The bulkhead enclosure with the door panels in the fully open position shall provide the minimum net clear opening required by Section R310.1A. Bulkhead enclosures shall also comply with _ Section R314.9. Bars, grills, covers, screens,or similar devices are permitted to be placed over emergency escape and rescue openings, bulkhead enclosures, or window wells that serve such openings, provided the minimum net clear opening size complies with Sections R310.1.1 to R310.1.3, and such devices shall be releaseable or removable from the inside without the use of a key, tool or force greater than that which is required for normal operation of the escape and rescue opening. Ladder and steps.Window wells with a vertical depth greater than 44 inches(1118 mm) below the adjacent ground level shall be equipped with a permanently affixed ladder or steps usable with the window in the fully open position. Ladders or steps required by this section shall not be required to comply with Section R314 and R315. Ladders or rungs shall have an inside width of at least 12 C` inches (305 mm), shall project at least 3 inches (76 mm) Q from the wall and shall be spaced not more than 18 inches (457 mm) on center vertically for the full height of the A X'B = 9 window well. SQUARE FEET Guard.Although the code does NOT specify requirements for guard around window wells to keep persons from falling into them,falls can and do occur. Because of the security devices such as grilles, bars and steel shutters. variations in size, location, and depth of window wells and Unless properly designed and constructed, these security since a guard could present an impediment to escape devices over emergency windows can completely defeat or rescue,the code is silent.The potential for falls into a window well should be evaluated by the homeowner and the purpose of the emergency escape and rescue window. suitable guards or visual barriers provide based on the The code makes provisions for use of security devices, location, depth and size of the well. Barriers, guards or provided the release mechanism has been approved by the covers installed to prevent falls must be placed in such building official and it is operable from the inside without the a way that does not impede use of the window well for use of a key or special knowledge. escape and rescue. If covers are used,the effects of snow Fire deaths have been attributed to the inability of the on the ability to open or remove them in an emergency individual to escape from the building because the security must also be evaluated. bars prevented emergency escape. Security devices should The ever-increasing concern for security, particularly in only be installed where absolutely necessary and only with a residential buildings has created a fairly large demand for permit after an evaluation by your local building and fire official. BGSO-GI01210.04 3 STAFF REPORT To: Planning Commission Report No.: VII.5 From: Kim Moore-Sykes, Assistant City Manager Date: September 20,2005 Subject: Zoning Ordinance Amendment-Vehicle Sales Prohibited Date Application Received: August 16,2005; Planning Commission Review Property Address: N/A Zoning District: All 60-Day Expires: N/A Background: Staff have received several complaints recently from residents about all the vehicles for sale at Wiltshire Park School parking lot. Because this use is not listed as allowable in the Zoning Ordinance for any zoning district,selling vehicles in this manner is not allowed. Vehicles parked on public property or public right- of-way would be cited and towed at the owner's expense. Wiltshire Park is considered private property and as such,the police can only respond if and when there is a call from the school staff. The Police and the Public Works Departments have been working with the school staff to determine a resolution to this situation. As a result of Staff discussion,I received a copy of the City of Falcon Heights' ordinance regarding vehicle sales. This ordinance language was used as an example of a possible ordinance that the City may adopt to alleviate the situation. This proposed language was sent to the City Attorney and the Police Department for their comments. Proposed Text: Section 926- Restrictions on Vehicle Sales 926.01 Residential Districts. Subd. 1 Motor vehicles and recreational vehicles which are permitted within the respective residential district may be advertised for sale and sold provided the vehicle is owned by the resident on whose property the vehicle is parked and to whom the vehicle is currently licensed and is operable. Vehicles that are displayed for sale shall not be parked or stored on public property or the public rights-of-way within the City of St. Anthony. Subd. 2. Commercial vehicles shall not be parked in a residential district and advertised for sale. 926.02 Non-Residential Districts. Subd. 1. Motor,commercial and recreational vehicles shall not be displayed "for sale" or sold within non-residential districts unless the vehicle is owned by the employee of said business where the vehicle is parked and with the consent of the business owner. H:\Planning\Staff Reports\2005\092005 Prohibited Vehicle Sales ord amd.doc Attachments: • Copy of Vehicle Sales Ordinance from the City of Falcon Heights HAPlanning\Staff Reports\2005\092005 Prohibited Vehicle Sales ord amd.doc CITY OF FALCON HEIGHTS RAMSEY COUNTY,MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 2004-01 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 9 OF THE FALCON HEIGHTS CITY CODE CONCERNING VEHICLE SALES THE CITY COUNCIL OF FALCON HEIGHTS ORDAINS: SECT— ION 1. Chapter 9 of the Falcon Heights City Code is amended b 9-13.08 to provide: htCiY adding Section 9-13.08 Vehicle Sales. Subdivision 1. Residential District. Motor vehicl es and recreational vehicles which are permitted within the respective residential district ma be advertised for sale and sold provided the vehicle is owned by the reside y wher the vehicle is parked and the vehicle is currently licensed and operable. Vehicles that e are displayed for sale shall not be parked or stored on public property or the public rights of way on Snelling Avenue 'and its frontage roads; r a Hamline Avenue Fairview Avenue, Roselawn Avenue and Cleveland Avenue. At no time shall an comm vehicle be parked within a residential district and advertised for sale. Y ercial Subdivision 2. Non-residential District. Motor, commercial an shall not be displayed "for sale" or sold within nonresidential districts unless as I vehicles an approved licensed sales dealership or for short term parking (12 hours or less) f the vehicle is owned by an employee of said business where the vehicle is arke the consent of the business owner. P d with SECT— I_?. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon is passage. ADOPTED this 5'day of May, 2004, by the City Council of Falcon Heights, Minnesota. CITY OF FALCON HEIGHTS BY: ATTEST: Susan L. Gehrz, Mayor Bather M. Worthington, Citgdministrator/Clerk STAFF REPORT To: Planning Commission Report No.: VII.6 From: Kim Moore-Sykes,Assistant City Manager 0157 Date: September 20,2005 Subject: Administrative Subdivision of Property-Kenzie Terrace Properties Date Application Received: Administrative Property Address: 2534 Kenzie Terrace (07-029-23-23-0008), 2538 Kenzie Terrace (07-029-23-23-0007), 2542 Kenzie Terrace (07-029-23-23-0006), 2546 Kenzie Terrace (07-029-23-23-0005), and 2548 Kenzie Terrace (07-029-23-23-0004) Zoning District: R-1 60-Day Expires: NA Requested Action: Subdivision of Property to combine the following contiguous lots into one parcel: 2534 Kenzie Terrace (07- 029-23-23-0008),2538 Kenzie Terrace (07-029-23-23-0007), 2542 Kenzie Terrace (07-029-23-23-0006),2546 Kenzie Terrace (07-029-23-23-0005), and 2548 Kenzie Terrace (07-029-23-23-0004) Back ound: In 1996, as part of their redevelopment plan for this area, the City Council met with the owners of 2534 Kenzie Terrace (07-029-23-23-0008), 2538 Kenzie Terrace (07-029-23-23-0007), 2542 Kenzie Terrace (07-029- 23-23-0006),2546 Kenzie Terrace (07-029-23-23-0005), and 2548 Kenzie Terrace (07-029-23-23-0004) to discuss the prospect of acquiring these properties. By 2000, the City had acquired all of these properties. On October 29, 2004, the City sold all of these lots to Autumn Woods Partners, LLP. As a part of the agreement, the City agreed to combine these lots into one parcel and record it with Hennepin County. Attachments: • Application • Hennepin County Property Maps with Legals • Public Notice H:\PIanning\Staff Reports\2005\09202005 2534 2548 Kenzie Lot Combo.doc I s _ 11 3301 Silver Lake Road •St. Anthony,MN 55418 • (p)612.782.3301 • (f)612.782.3302 www.ci.saint-anthony.mn.us SUBDIVISION/PLAT APPROVAL APPLICATION Application is hereby made for a SUBDIVISION/PLAT APPROVAL for a lot split/lot combination. The resultant size of the existing lot: X ;lot area: sf Size of new lot created: X ;new lot area: 42,649 sf (.98 acre) ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 2538 2542 2546 and 2548 Kenzie Terrace PID(s): See attached. PRESENT LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See attached. PROPOSED LEGAL DESCRIPTION: OWNER: Autumn Woods Partners,LLP CONTACT NAME(print): PHONE: ADDRESS: FAX: CITY/ZIP: EMAIL: APPLICANT: City of St Anthony CONTACT NAME: PHONE: ADDRESS: 3301 Silver Lake Road FAX: CITY/ZIP: St Anthony MN 55418 EMAIL: APP C Sign to Date OWNER'S Signature Date AD INIST �SUBDI S OF PROPERTY/LOT COMBINATION PCD IN'IST=ATIV=E DATA SU'R�7EY:=OfficeWse®nl'y" FEE PLALVNINGCOMMISSION p �� ?�`� ?`'`� � ��. M�Y 3.7 3,'"'f. ., „' ."$�' (;' i w <iz+iza .`y$ l y.� '. Y ' -' s;; `ApPlicanonlreceive •� _, -_: ',�,;<_, , Approve s-: ' b ; ;' n$ -was r^ryp{ �. .•< r' :, ,, Feepaid rx Denied: a �•"r ems: ��,w_ -. , Dateof C, once tYHear."ing': :< _ Dja C&&Z `., .. �. -s' s-tee ., *a� ,s ,. •,.,'" ,#,;, �s'"—.r ��m'„ CourrcriAczzorr. w > • �DateofPulilic;I3earing _ .y? � oaAppro�ed � ;t� � �:�.;� . ••,�Ri';� � §� yff s ��. � ;:� �d �'��"-�>�s2R.. ;�� '�"` `�_" cr„i�° '� g,!� 'fir°�� ' � '� `t, t �pva} ;,'a=Sa uµfr yyt� z°i',"' ,'t, t• '''* i, < L, S - t�, ffie s y :> Resolution-,Number _-_a `S' Date:'+'�?�x�**,-;;:'t�s,.':. •Y „. �.��?'>X3.t� � r"� �i�„< e:,i,'�,. -�'", `�- r.�.�-• 5• ,�."-'�;�-g':?c.'ta�,• >., a:' Continued on the backside of this sheet. H:\Planning\Fonns\SubdivisionPlat Approval Applicantion 2005.doc Default Page 1 of 2 Hennepin County Property Map Give us your feedbac Hennepin County Su How to use Map 2501 an 1111111121111- 2542 WW wo am , 4 go Iowa 'E Im win 2538 1110 For quicker respon, information on surr, Sri St 'Recenter on click'. Show: . , G Aerial Photos Ofi C 2004`Aerials On Recenter C City Names on click 2520 2605 2M F Street Names 61� Yes E Address Number (' No F Lot Dimensions Last update,8/11/2005 at 3:30 PM—READ IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER INFORMATION BELOW Click for detailed information on this parcel Approximate Property Approximate Property 'Mpls aerials south of Fran Property ID Perimeter Area from 2003 07-029-23-23-0008 499 ft. 9,896 sq.ft.=0.23 acres Property Address Market Value Total Tax(2005) 2534 KENZIE TER ST.ANTHONY,MN $0 $000 55418 The data contained on this page are derived from a compilation of records and maps and may contain discrepancies that can onl licensed land surveyor. The perimeter and area (square footage and acres) are approximates and may contain discrepancies.Th purposes only. Hennepin County does not guarantee the accuracy of material herein contained and Is not responsible for any mi- derivatives. Please report any map discrepancies to the Hennepin County Survey Division via e-mail at Surveyor.MapS(cbco.hennepil The quality of the display may be influenced by your screen size and resolution setting and is best viewed at 1024x768 or higher Explorer 3.02 or Netscape 2.01 or later version for proper operation. Home I Your County Government I Licenses, Certificates, &Registration I Employment &Volunteering I Health, Housing, &Social Services I Law, Public Safety, &Courts I Environment, Property, &Transportation Copyright © 2005 Hennepin County, Minnesota I www.Hennepin.us http:Hwwwl3.co.hennepin.mn.us/publicparcelimage/default.aspx?PID=0702923230008 8/26/2005 0?53� t(MZ,le" 14rVA4 -, EXHIBIT "A" That part of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 7, Township 29, Range 23 described as follows: Commencing on a line drawn parallel with and 193 .7 feet North of the South line of said Northwest 1/4 at the point at which said line intersects a line drawn South 38 degrees 16 1/2 minutes East from a point on the Southeasterly line of the Old St. Anthony and Taylor' s Falls Road which is Northeasterly 526.96 feet, measured-along said Southeasterly line, from its intersection with the South line of said Northwest 1/4; thence West along said line drawn parallel and 193 .7 feet North of the South line of said Northwest 1/4 59 .72 feet to the actual point of beginning; thence Northwesterly deflecting to the right at an angle of 50 degrees 01 minute a distance of 48.8 feet; thence Southwesterly deflecting to the left at an angle of 91 degrees 01 minute a distance of 6.15 feet; thence Northwesterly in a straight line a distance of 86 .3 feet, more or less, to a point on said Southeasterly line of said Road 473 .52 feet, measured along said Southeasterly line, from its intersection with the the South line of said Northwest 1/4; thence Southwesterly along said Southeasterly line 163 feet, more or less, to the intersection of said Southeasterly line with said line drawn parallel with and 193 .7 feet North of the South line of said Northwest 1/4; thence East along said parallel line to the actual point of beginning. Default Page 1 of 2 Hennepin County Property Map Give us your feedbac Hennepin County Su How to use Map e� 2548 2542 For quicker respom SL AnIftiny information on sura 'Recenter on click'. Show: mp tis r-Aerial Photos Ofl a94 C- 2004*Aerials On Recenter F City Names on click [✓ Street Names r'� Yes 25= 2505 2809 2813 Address Number �' No F ot Dimensions Last update.8/11/2005 at 3:30 PM--READ IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER INFORMATION BELOW Click for detailed information on this parcel Approximate Property Approximate Property *Mpls.aerials south of Fran Property ID Perimeter Area from 2003 07-029-23-23-0007 412 ft. 7,272 sq.ft.=0.17 acres Property Address Market Value Total Tax(2005) 2538 KENZIE TER ST.ANTHONY, MN $0 $000 55418 The data contained on this page are derived from a compilation of records and maps and may contain discrepancies that can on[ licensed land surveyor. The perimeter and area (square footage and acres) are approximates and may contain discrepancies. Th purposes only. Hennepin County does not guarantee the accuracy of material herein contained and is not responsible for any me derivatives. Please report any map discrepancies to the Hennepin County Survey Division via e-mail at Surveyor.Maps@co.hennepll The quality of the display may be Influenced by your screen size and resolution setting and is best viewed at 1024x768 or higher Explorer 3.02 or Netscape 2.01 or later version for proper operation. Home I Your County Government I Licenses, Certificates, & Registration I Employment&Volunteering I Health, Housing, &Social Services I Law, Public Safety, &Courts I Environment, Property, &Transportation Copyright © 2005 Hennepin County, Minnesota I www.Hennepin.us http://wwwl3.co.hennepin.mn.us/publicparcelimage/default.aspx?PID=0702923230007 8/26/2005 EXHIBIT A 2538 Kenzie Terrace St. Anthony, MN 55418 COM AT A PT IN THE SELY LINE OF CO HWY NO 33 DIS 473 52&100 FT NELY FROM ITS INTERSEC WITH THE S LINE OF NW 1&4 DIS 37137&100 FT E FROM SW COR THEREOF TH CONT NELY 53 44&100 FT TH S 38 DEG 16 MIN 30 SECONDS E TO A PT IN A LINE PAR WITH AND 193 7&10 FT N FROM THE S LINE OF NW 1&4 TH W ALONG SAID PAR LINE 59 72&100 FT TH NWLY AT AN ANGLE TO THE RT OF 50 DEG 01 MIN A DIS OF 48 8&10 FT TH SWLY AT AN ANGLE TO THE LEFT OF 91 DEG 01 MIN A DIS OF 6 15&100 FT TH NWLY 86 3&10 FT TO BEG EX HWY Default Page 1 of 2 Hennepin County Property Map Give us your feedbac Hennepin County Su How to use Map 2548 OR on MR MR 2548 RD For quicker respons rt 2842 information on sura txt SL Antany 'Recenter on click'. Show: zM r-Aerial Photos Ofi G 2004`Aerials On Recenter 2534 94 C City Names on click (v_�`Street Names �!' Yes C Address Number (' No F Lot Dimensions Last update.8/11/2005 at 3.30 PM--READ IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER INFORMATION BELOW Click for detailed information on this parcel Approximate Property Approximate Property 'Mpls.aerials south of Fran Property ID Perimeter Area from 2003 07-029-23-23-0006 407 ft. 8,654 sq ft.=0.2 acres Property Address Market Value Total Tax(2005) 2542 KENZIE TER ST.ANTHONY,MN 55418 $0 $0.00 The data contained on this page are derived from a compilation of records and maps and may contain discrepancies that can onl licensed land surveyor.The perimeter and area (square footage and acres) are approximates and may contain discrepancies. Th purposes only. Hennepin County does not guarantee the accuracy of material herein contained and is not responsible for any mi: derivatives. Please report any map discrepancies to the Hennepin County Survey Division via e-mail at Surveyor.Maps0)co.hennepll The quality of the display may be influenced by your screen size and resolution setting and is best viewed at 1024x768 or higher Explorer 3.02 or Netscape 2.01 or later version for proper operation. Home I Your County Government I Licenses, Certificates, &Registration I Employment&Volunteering I Health, Housing, &Social Services I Law, Public Safety, &Courts I Environment, Property, &Transportation Copyright © 2005 Hennepin County, Minnesota I www.Hennepin.us n-l;,.., I u,.........:., r.,,,..�., I c,,,.�,.�t.,m.:...... c�-.�........,� http://wwwl3.co.hennepin.mn.us/publicparcelimage/default.aspx?PID=0702923230006 9/15/2005 tFRTCO/MPLS N Continuation of SCHEDULE C File NQ. 59-2902C Section 7; thence Northeasterly along Che southeasterly line of said Road, a distance of 8 feet; thence at a right angle Southeasterly a distance of 1,50 feet; thence at a right angle Southwesterly a distance of 8 feet; thence at a right angle Northwesterly a distance of 150 feet to the point of. beginning. First American Title Insurance Company Default Page 1 of 2 Hennepin County Property Map Give us your feedbac Hennepin County Su How to use Map 9-0SEP8 an 0111 an so 25" � • ma am For quicker respon: information on surr, 254 'Recenter on click'. Show: Aerial Photos Ofi 2542 94 2004*Aerials On Recenter 2538 City Names on click Street Names r:, Yes zs [T Address Number No Lot Dimensions Last update:8/11/2005 at 3.30 PM--READ IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER INFORMATION BELOW Click for detailed information on this parcel Approximate Property Approximate Property `Mpls.aerials south of Fran Property ID from 2003 Perimeter Area 07-029-23-23-0005 405 ft. 8,556 sq.ft.=0.2 acres Property Address Market Value Total Tax(2005) 2546 KENZIE TER ST.ANTHONY,MN $0 $0.00 55418 The data contained on this page are derived from a compilation of records and maps and may contain discrepancies that can onl licensed land surveyor. The perimeter and area (square footage and acres) are approximates and may contain discrepancies.Th purposes only. Hennepin County does not guarantee the accuracy of material herein contained and is not responsible for any mi: derivatives. Please report any map discrepancies to the Hennepin County Survey Division via e-mail at Surveyor.MapS@co.hennepil The quality of the display may be influenced by your screen size and resolution setting and is best viewed at 1024x768 or higher Explorer 3.02 or Netscape 2.01 or later version for proper operation. Home I Your County Government I Licenses, Certificates, &Registration I Employment&volunteering I Health, Housing, &Social Services I Law, Public Safety, &Courts I Environment, Property, &Transportation Copyright © 2005 Hennepin County, Minnesota I www.Hennepin.us n..t;... I r,...,�-,,.f u..........:.. �,.,�..�-„ I c,..-...:r„ins:..-.,... I h ://wwwl3.co.henne in.mn.us/ ublic arcelimage/default.aspx?PID=0702923230005 9/15/2005 ttP P p p - _Form NA-personal Representative's Deed Minnesota Uniform Conveyancing Blanks(1978) oaw.Lo nua. ��i��ra c�nC.G'd'w'.ubi+,F.s,:i4at7Efl Individual Personal Representative to Corporation or Partnership � 92394H6NkFFJJ!CCCf6i t7irlid�SulA i CERTIFIED Fll OR i No delinquetceiv'ej)an +kicatie of realUN� ' estate value rd transfer entered g T _7M 9; cad °n — , 19 , r 792#3 4 amprr� rtrsar� /? �'� �� ccs.PEC P,0gR D County Auditor a 8 PUT I ' Deputy 7 0CT97 9:38 8679239 ;''7 .50 7 0CT97 9:38 86792394 d,' $5-010 i STATE DEED TAX DUE HEREON:$ 91120 70CT97 9:38 86792394 0013 $1 i 0(] Date: �gptember e?? , 19 97 Ib,( (reserved for recording data) FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION,_Jac aueline M Helm I i as Personal Representative of the Estate of Lloyd B. Helm , Grantor, ' Decedent, single ®, married ❑ at the time of death, hereby conveys to Hous incr and Redeve o met ?rotesAuthority of An bony Mi nnacnra , Grantee, apublic body corporate/un erP e�laws of Minnesota p p y County, Minnesota, described as follows: real property in - Hennepin f That part of Section 7, Township 29, North Range 23, West of the 4th Principal Meridian, described as follows: Commencing at a point in Southeasterly line of Old St. Anthony and Taylor Falls Road distant 584.77 feet Northeasterly along road from its intersection with Southline of Northwest 1/4; thence Northeasterly along road 60 feet; thence Southeasterly at right angles 150 feet; thence Southwesterly at right angles 60 feet; thence Northwesterly 150 feet to beginning, except State Highway, according to the United States Government Survey thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. U7 �9-a3- a3-000s-" The Seller certifies that the seller does not know of any wells on the described property. I 10/07/97 9 20AM 000A#5 104 ( DEEDTX $210.60 i (if more space is needed,continue on back) PAID $210.00 together with all hereditaments and appurtenances belonging thereto. STATE OF MINNESOTA ac el' a M. Helm COUNTY OF6(q 11�Vi A The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this g _day of September 1997 by Jaccrueline M. Helm , as Personal Representative of the Estate of r.l wd R 14t-lm ece t. NOTARYFWUC--WM ' Nota ub ' Wy comm. ,>rm.s�.zoao 1 JACQUELINE M. HELM , SPOUSE OF DECEDENT, CONSENTS TO THIS DEED. i Name of Spouse .�+r. 0�.r%*-CI. m• 8400(1/97)5M Default Page 1 of 2 Hennepin County Property Map Give usyour feedbac Hennepin County Su How to use Map 4� For quicker respont q SL 2M information on sura A"m"y 94 'Recenter on click'. Show: > r Aerial Photos Ofi C, 2004*Aerials On Int Recenter 2543 C City Names on click F Street Names Yes F Address Number No F Lot Dimensions Last update-8/11/2005 at 3:30 PM--READ IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER INFORMATION BELOW Click for detailed information on this parcel Approximate Property Approximate Property f aerials south of Fran Property ID Perimeter Area froomm 2003 07-029-23-23-0004 400 ft 8,271 sq.ft. =0.19 acres Property Address Market Value Total Tax(2005) 2548 KENZIE TER ST ANTHONY,MN $0 $0.00 55418 The data contained on this page are derived from a compilation of records and maps and may contain discrepancies that can onl licensed land surveyor.The perimeter and area (square footage and acres) are approximates and may contain discrepancies. Th purposes only. Hennepin County does not guarantee the accuracy of material herein contained and is not responsible for any mi. derivatives. Please report any map discrepancies to the Hennepin County Survey Division via e-mail at Surveyor,MapS@CO.hennepil The quality of the display may be influenced by your screen size and resolution setting and is best viewed at 1024x768 or higher Explorer 3.02 or Netscape 2.01 or later version for proper operation. Home I Your County Government I Licenses, Certificates, &Registration I Employment&Volunteering I Health, Housing, &Social Services I Law, Public Safety, &Courts I Environment, Property, &Transportation Copyright © 2005 Hennepin County, Minnesota I www.Hennepin.us n..i:,.,. I http://wwwl3.co.hennepin.mn.us/publicparcelimage/default.aspx?PID=0702923230004 9/15/2005 log EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION That part of the Northwest Quarter of Section 7, Township 29, Range 23, described as follows: Commencing at a point in the Southeasterly line of Old St. Anthony and Taylor's Falls Road, distant 644.77 feet Northeasterly along said road line from its intersection with the South line of said Northwest Quarter, thence Northeasterly along said road line 60 feet; thence Southeasterly at right angles 150 feet, thence Southwesterly at right angles 60 feet, thence Northwesterly at right angles 150 feet to beginning, excepting the Northwesterly 7 feet thereof taken for highway purposes, according to the United States Government Survey thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. CITY OF ST. ANTHONY NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR A SUBDIVISION OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2534—2548 KENZIE TERRACE Notice is hereby given . . . To conduct a public hearing on the subdivision and administratively combine of the lots located at 2534 Kenzie Terrace (07-029-23-23-0008), 2538 Kenzie Terrace (07-029-23-23-0007), 2542 Kenzie Terrace (07-029- 23-23-0006), 2546 Kenzie Terrace (07-029-23-23-0005), and 2548 Kenzie Terrace (07-029-23-23-0004) in preparation for recordation with Hennepin County. STAFF REPORT To: Planning Commission Report No.: VIII.1 From: Kim Moore-Sykes, Assistant City Manager Date: September 20, 2005 Subject: Proposal for 2520 Kenzie Terrace (KFC Site) Date Application Received: N/A Property Address: 2520 Kenzie Zoning District: C 60-Day Expires: NA Requested Action: Concept Review Background: John Harriss,Harriss Architects,is representing a group of developers that are interested in redeveloping 2520 Kenzie Terrace,the old KCF site. The parcel is currently zoned Commercial. Their proposal is to rezone the lot to an R-4 and construct an owner-occupied condominium with 33 units. Because of the size of the lot,they may also request a variance to the height restriction to construct a 4-floor building. They have a similar project on Central Avenue. Attachments: • Renderings,Site Plan H:\Planning\Staff Reports\2005\09202005 2520 KenzieKFC Concept Review.doc - 2 ;3.31�1nd Ave.No. Suite 200 Minneapolis MN 55401 I NEREHY CER—TINT T.S Rnll, 5({CJfgATION OR REINNf VAS PREAREO -YE TR OI-A DULY EO ST RED ARC TINT I AM A THEY AWS Of'TH ARCHITECT LINTER THE LAWS OC THE STATE OE MINNESOTA DATE: Ax+ RECRTRAT_N0:22603 aKENZIE a TERRACE r. �, ., . �t � N, CONDOMINIUMS 1" +, n KENZIE TERRACE ' & LOWRY +77- ,77T77 - - AVENUE r T v Afll $ C ST.ANTHONY,MN {" p sir 55410 to i" , 4 c ..._ o...,b'.,, s... -..e..u,r.�..+.,x. r..,.._._ w..�.w..�rv+.wm-.. ......e.o-....._ F3 �a ry PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Y � e DEN Jl l G N:I 04a Km DATE : 09/15/05 REVISIONS NO. DATE INFORMATION EXISTING SITE REFERENCE PLAN A0 I' AO SCALE: . 7O'-0' SITE-3-FINAL JOB NUMBER 2508 HA 331 Second Ave.No. Suite 2tq Mtrv-P ji. MN 55401 I NERES CE—THAT"'SP"" SPEC I)CN OR REPORT NAS PRMKO t . BY W OR UNDER RT DREU SOPS w AND THAT A 1 A DULY REGISTERED qac I t *I ARCHITECT UNDER THE iA S OF THE STATE OF UMNESOTA DATE: REasTRx,xM ND 22603 .a x KENZIE TERRACE -" CONDOMINIUMS KENZIE % TERRACE LOWRY AVENUE , ST.ANTHONY,MN i 55418 r - 0 - > I , 0W;,,R ti1=Nu� _ PRELPAINRY NOTFOR CONS TRUCTION ROM PIAN DATE : 09/15/05 REVISIONS N0. DATE INFORMATION SITE REFERENCE PLAN-AERIAL PHOTO OVERLAY Al SCALE: I'. 30'-0' SITE-I-FINAL JOB NUMBER 2508 PROJECT DATA 331SmandA—N. smvwo Us bw Swi 19 SURFACE PARKING= SPACES INST�'�' aM M� W YE A UI AN W XY REGISTERED GIST 9M ARU TNTARCMM I AN A DULY WS OFNTH STATE F INNER T�UY5 OF lIS SEATS OF MINNESOTA 4-1 PARKING GARAGE SPACES DATE.- .,,.. 22603 � NESEC ,,.. 22603 6(o TOTAL (2 per UNIT) LINE OF PAFKPIG ——— —— ——— — GARAGE BELOW a TWICE colmowmms SETBACK EENZIE TERRACE Od R •,' -S s � n. LORRY TLI;alAVENUE ST.ANTHONY,MN 55418 01 \ Q / LRIE OF PARKPIG GARAGE BELOW / 5 D a /PARK \\ - - - - - - - - - - - — — — - - - - - - - - - T • \ ' PRELMINARY LOWRY AVENUE NOTFOR CONSTRUCTION OxEn mEam DATE : 09 15 05 REVISIONS N0. DATE INFORMATION CONCEPT SITE PLAN A2 SCALE I'. 70'-0' SITE-3-FINAL JOB NUMBER 4508 331 SeLmld Ava No. SWm BIO /' T'�Wule+polia MN 55401 ' I M!7>EWY CFR1 THAT MIS RIN. —————— SI ME OR Uwi RE�I SIPREPAn If ME O D01T dl REPORT WAS PfWPII✓m %,C6 AND TMAT 1 AM A DULY REDh'IERED NiCNDECT UNDER ME LAWS 0(ME / , \�C$• STATEO MINNESOTA DATE- TR. 3 REm1RATION � N�22603 , 3 Si / \ \ KM \ \/K PARKING GARAGE 77973GROSS - Ewa NFT I �,WO W.,Y 41 PARKG 9'- SPACES• 0'x19'-0'EG , �. KENZIE TERRACE e & LOWRY FOR REFERE CE BuouN AVENUE ST.ANTHONY,MN 55418 UNDERGROUND PARKING GARAGE PLAN \,L3",l SCALE I'. 20'-0' SITE•2-FNAL — ------------j LPA OF C-4RAGE BELOW , / 1,143 1,280 1,143 1,280 1,344 1,209 0 1,209 / T 1,183 T PRELD4 ARY \� 1'200 " C O OM 1,050 1,200 NOT FOR R %� 1,183 1,280 CONSTRUCTION C ~ 1,050 I L 69' 1,110 37 0' ENTRY GY.IOPY 0• 1,110 BELOW awm�N l�fl \\ FIRST LEVEL RESIDENTIAL W1mm > (6)CON NiumUJITS SECOND - FOURTH LEVEL MA ' 1 COYPDNITY ROOM (9)CONDOMNUM WITS PER FLOOR ' 9,175 GROSS Sa FT Q349 GROOS 9a PT PER / DATE 09/15/05 REVISIONS \ NO. DATE INFORMATION \ FIRST LEVEL RESIDENTIAL PLAN 3 SECOND -FOURTH LEVEL RESIDENTIAL PLAN A3 SCALE I'. 20'-0' 517E-1•FII'IAL A3 SCALE 1'. 20'-0' SITE-2-FNAL A3 JOB NUMBER 2508 PRESS RELEASE 01-IL NAMED AS ST. ANTHONY POLICE CHIEF The City of St. Anthony is pleased to announce that Capt. John A. Ohl has accepted the position of Police Chief. Capt. Ohl has worked as a police officer with the City of St. Anthony for 21 years, starting as a patrol officer in 1984. Through his years with the Department, he has worked in many capacities, including Crime Prevention Officer, Firearms Instructor, Use of Force Instructor, Criminal Investigator and Lieutenant in charge of Criminal Investigations. In his current position as Captain, he has worked as second-in-command for the Department, which at times has made him responsible for the City's overall law enforcement operations. In addition to his professional accomplishments, Capt. Ohl has a Bachelor's Degree from the University of Minnesota and certification for Police Management from the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA). He has attended the National Emergency Response and Rescue Training Center's Course on Terrorism and Risk Assessment, the U.S. Department of Homeland Securities Continuity of Operations, the University of Southern Illinois Police Institute's Management of Small Law Enforcement Agencies, as well as many other management and operations-related coursework. Mike Morrison, St. Anthony City Manager, stated that based on Capt. Ohl's record with the Department, his education, training, and extensive experience, the decision naming him as the City's next police chief was an easy one for Morrison to make. Capt. Ohl replaces retiring police chief, Richard Engstrom. I CITY OF ST. ANTHONY 2 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES 3 AUGUST 23, 2005 4 5 CALL TO ORDER. 6 Mayor Faust called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 7 8 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. 9 Mayor Faust invited the Council and audience to join him in the Pledge of Allegiance. 10 11 ROLL CALL. 12 Present: Mayor Faust; Councilmembers Gray, Horst, Stille, and Thuesen. 13 Absent: None. 14 Also Present: City Manager Mike Mornson and City Attorney Jerome Gilligan. 15 16 CONSIDERATION, DISCUSSION, AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON ALL OF THE FOLLOWING 17 ITEMS. 18 19 I. APPROVAL OF AUGUST 23, 2005 CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA. 20 Motion by Councilmember Horst, seconded by Councilmember Stille, to approve the City 21 Council Meeting Agenda of August 23, 2005 with the removal of Item VI. A. Resolution 05-063 22 which was requested to be removed from the agenda by the applicant. 23 24 Motion carried unanimously. 25 26 II. PROCLAMATIONS AND RECOGNITIONS. 27 None. 28 29 III. CONSENT AGENDA. 30 A. Consider August 9 2005 Council meeting minutes. 31 B. Consider licenses and permits. 32 C. Consider payment of claims. 33 34 Motion by Councilmember Thuesen, seconded by Councilmember Gray, to approve the Consent 35 Agenda items. 36 37 Motion carried unanimously. 38 39 IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS. 40 None. 41 42 V. REPORTS FROM COMMISSION AND STAFF. 43 A. Presentation of History Research by Sarah Campbell, Intern 44 Mike Morrison introduced Sarah Campbell, Intern. Sarah is a graduate student at St. Thomas. 45 Her last day is tomorrow. 46 47 Ms. Campbell gave an overview of the information she covered in her time with the City. She 48 explained she is a graduate student in the history department at St. Thomas, with a focus on City Council Regular Meeting Minutes August 23, 2005 Page 2 1 architectural history. She noted the idea of the history research was begun by orm Y vias o 2 -o _ . 3 4 Ms. Campbell said she began to form a collection of photos, which are now organized by street 5 address or property type. She said one of the most valuable sources was a public meeting held in 6 May. She met the Fire Chief at that meeting,who showed her the history of the Fire 7 Department. She added that she took a tour of the city, attended a Lions Club luncheon, went to 8 historical societies and visited public libraries. She talked with Florence Marks who talked of 9 her work with the cemetery. She said she learned more information through several churches in 10 the city. Throughout the process she kept an eye out for photos that demonstrated the city's 11 history. A series of oral histories by the former librarian was found. The oral histories provided 12 insight into the lives of St. Anthony residents. She found that dances were held on weekends, 13 and kids swam in Silver Lake. A tape by Russell Paul in 1988 described life in St. Anthony. 14 The Salvation Army camp is one of the most identifiable locations in the City. It was important 15 to residents in the early part of the twentieth century. She said she gathered names of more 16 people that may be interested in giving further oral histories. She noted there is a stack of photos 17 of pictures of houses that have not yet been identified. She suggested forming a local historical 18 society and indicated she received calls from interested residents for such a society. She thanked 19 the residents for their support. 20 21 Councilmember Horst asked when residents will be able to see the exhibit. Ms. Campbell 22 explained it will be a month or so after sending the project to a framer. 23 24 Mayor Faust noted the city was incorporated in 1945. We are near losing oral histories and 25 pointed out that Ms. Campbell was good at getting the oral histories. 26 27 VI. REPORTS FROM PLANNING COMMISSION,DON JENSEN,PRESENTING. 28 A. Consider Resolution 05-063, re: Adopt Variance to city ordinance to allowilrson 29 balconies at 2401 —2407 391h Avenue and 2510—2550 381'Avenue. 30 Item was removed at the request of the applicant. 31 32 B. Consider Resolution 05-064, re: Adopt Variance to side yard setback to install an egress 33 window at 2909 3CP Avenue. 34 Commissioner Jensen said six members were present at the last Planning Commission meeting 35 and all motions relating to this item were either all in favor or all against. He said that the 36 resident provided testimony as far as suggestions for fencing. There was testimony from the Fire 37 Marshall regarding the safety concerns. This is an area of the Code that needed to have some 38 changes. However, approval was unanimously recommended. He suggested the 39 Councilmembers read the report if they desired more detail. 40 41 Mayor Faust asked if the Fire Chief's concerns were related to falling in the egress window. 42 Commissioner Jensen answered the neighbor's concerns were related to falling in. The Fire 43 Chief's concerns were for safety and he didn't share that same concern of falling in. 44 45 Commissioner Jensen explained the egress window is planned for the west side of the house. 46 The Zoning Ordinance does not allow egress windows in the side yard setback. The owners City Council Regular Meeting Minutes August 23, 2005 Page 3 1 have considered putting the egress window on the front of the house; however a gas main enters 2 the house there. The east end has the driveway. 3 4 Mark Steadman, applicant, stated they believe they have arrested the concerns of the Planning 5 Commission and are trying to address concerns of the neighbor. He said he had a safety 6 perspective and he is trying to address storm water problems and the aesthetics perspective. The 7 City and Planning Staff seem to be in favor. 8 9 Mayor Faust asked if he lived at this house. He answered he does not, but his daughter lives 10 there with a roommate. 11 12 Motion by Councilmember Thuesen, seconded by Councilmember Gray, to adopt Resolution 05- 13 064, re: Approve variance to side yard setback to install an egress window at 2909 30`s Avenue. 14 15 Councilmember Stille stated he is in favor of an egress window, but opposed to the way in which 16 we are doing this. Our hardship is that the house was built before the Zoning Code. He said he 17 does not like to rely on those types of findings. When the applicant purchased the house, he 18 knew the Code existed. The Code did not create the problem. If this variance is allowed, it sets 19 a precedence. He stated that having some sort of approval of a Conditional Use Permit would 20 make sense. Each house is different. We cannot require a fence to approve this variance. The 21 applicant made a good presentation and seems to be sincere. He said he has an issue with regard 22 to the hardship issue, given the circumstances, and the precedence being set. 23 24 Councilmember Horst stated in reviewing this case, it seems the Planning Commission and the 25 Fire Chiefs primary concern was to have some type of egress in the house. It is now required in 26 the basements of houses by state code. He said the City should get the Ordinance changed to 27 allow these windows. The fact that setbacks have to be decided on is a problem with small lots. 28 Safety should be the concern. In newer homes this is a requirement, so we need to approve this 29 variance and get busy on the text amendment change. 30 31 Mayor Faust said he is against the variance for two reasons. One reason is what Councilmember 32 Stille mentioned regarding the fact that the owner knew the Code when he bought the house. 33 This may be for economic gain, and it causes economic opportunity when egress windows are 34 allowed. Another issue is that he said he is apprehensive about approving just one variance. If it 35 were done through Conditional Use applications, it would allow the opportunity to see how it 36 would apply to all instances. This is not a safety issue since no one is living in the basement,but 37 it could be in the future. 38 39 Councilmember Thuesen agreed with Councilmember Horst that the safety issues do need to be 40 considered. He stated that hearing the dialogue from Councilmember Stille and Mayor Faust,he 41 gets the sense that there would be a better way to go about this. If we deny this, it is not that the 42 applicant cannot come back and approach this in a different means. At this point,he said he is 43 inclined to agree with the Mayor and Councilmember Stille that we need to take a second look at 44 it. 45 46 Councilmember Horst noted the Planning Commission had a lengthy discussion. Commissioner 47 Jensen confirmed. He said the Commission felt there were a number of encroachments that were City Council Regular Meeting Minutes August 23, 2005 Page 4 1 described in the Code. Stairs, eves and other projections from the house can come into that same 2 space. The Code states if it was written at that time, then it was not allowed. It provides no 3 different an obstacle than other protrusions that are allowed. Window wells are an allowable 4 encroachment into a side yard. He said they felt it met the test of the Code. They felt the 5 findings were not a stretch. They did feel that it should be approved. 6 7 Councilmember Horst pointed out a lot of thought was given by the Commissioners, which we 8 asked them to do. He said the Council should be careful on making changes. However, this 9 adds value to the house. It is a safety issue, and it is a smart idea whether anyone lives in the 10 basement or not. 11 12 Mr. Steadman explained the basement is finished and there is a bedroom down there. It is used. 13 14 Councilmember Horst stated the hardship has always been the hardest to prove. He said the 15 Council should carefully look at what the Planning Commission has done before the Council 16 dismisses this. He said he is still in favor of approving the variance. 17 18 Mayor Faust reminded Councilmember Horst that when an egress window is added, it creates 19 another bedroom and that adds value. That is the reason the builders have put them in. He said 20 he doesn't disagree that we should have them, but he said he thinks it should be done in a 21 thoughtful manner. 22 23 Councilmember Stille said he is not against this kind of window. 24 25 Councilmember Gray stated he is inclined to agree with Councilmember Horst. When it is a 26 matter of safety, he said he doesn't see any reason to delay. It can increase the value. He said 27 the Council has to look at how they will allow these, and consider safety issues. The hardship 28 issue seems to be ever-changing, and he said he would like to see it more defined. He 29 commented he thinks this is important enough to go ahead and approve it. 30 31 Councilmember Thuesen commented he supports the applicant and the thought of safety. He 32 said he hopes if this is denied, the applicant will be willing to resubmit a plan. 33 34 Ayes—2,Nays—3 (Stille, Thuesen and Mayor Faust). Motion failed. 35 36 Motion by Councilmember Stille, seconded by Councilmember Thuesen,to deny Resolution 05- 37 064, re: Approve variance to side yard setback to install an egress window at 2909 30th Avenue. 38 39 Ayes—3,Nays—2 (Horst and Gray), Motion carried. 40 41 C. Consider Resolution 05-065,re: to amend section 1640.02 of the zoning ordinance to 42 allow caterinwbanquet activities as a conditional use in the industrial zoning district. 43 Mr. Jenson reviewed the resolution with the Council and indicated that there was very little 44 discussion and it was approved unanimously at the Planning Commission meeting. 45 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes August 23,2005 Page 5 1 Mayor Faust confirmed that sections (h) "Assembly,meeting lodge, or convention halls"and(i) 2 "catering operations cafeterias and delicatessens"were added to the text. This is a Conditional 3 Use Permit in the LI Zoning District. Mr. Jensen confirmed. 4 5 Mr. Morrison noted that zoning text changes only require one reading. The applicant will still 6 have to submit an application for a Conditional Use Permit. 7 8 Mayor Faust asked if a liquor license would need to be issued if this text amendment is allowed. 9 Mr. Gilligan explained that as a catering operation they will have a liquor license through the 10 state. This would be outside the City's control. The City could put conditions on the license 11 through the Conditional Use Permit. 12 13 Motion by Councilmember Horst, seconded by Councilmember Gray,to adopt Resolution 05- 14 065,re: to Amend Section 1640.02 of the zoning Ordinance to allow cateringibanquet activities 15 as a permitted Conditional Use in the Industrial Zoning District. 16 17 Motion carried unanimously. 18 19 D. Consider Resolution 05-066 re: Adopt Variance for building setback Amcon St. 20 Anthony. 21 Commissioner Jensen reviewed items D., E., and F. with the Council and indicated that the 22 Planning Commission considered each item separately in their meeting. The Commission felt all 23 requirements were met. 24 25 Mr. Paul Tucci, Oppidan, gave an overview of the request. He explained this is the revised site 26 plan from the last request. The building setback variance is requested because there are five feet 27 on the west corner and they would prefer to have twelve feet. The position of the building is 28 similar to the original approval,however this is a smaller building. One of the other requests is 29 in regard to the proximity of the restaurant to the residential area. The size of this building is the 30 same as the original request. They are asking for approval since the original approval has 31 expired. He noted they are also asking for a variance on the parking. He said they have a floor 32 plan for the restaurant that shows 161 seats. Previous approval of the 6,000 square foot 33 restaurant was with 27 parking spots. The square footage on this site is 1,500 square feet less 34 than it was of general retail. It is the same amount of restaurant square footage. He said he 35 wasn't clear on how the 27 parking spots were arrived at. 36 37 Mayor Faust noted the variances were withdrawn and the applicant denied the amendment to the 38 agreement. 39 40 Councilmember Stille asked if a rendering of what the building will look like has been 41 developed. 42 43 Mr. Tucci showed the four elevations. He said they have submitted to the City the photographs 44 of an existing building they will base this from. They eliminated the drive through and put in a 45 door to access the proposed patio. The north elevation drew a great deal of discussion at the 46 Planning Commission meeting due to the gateway from southbound. There were egress doors 47 but he said they will also put glass on the back that will be opaque. He explained that as people City Council Regular Meeting Minutes August 23, 2005 Page 6 1 are driving, they can see the light coming out,but won't be able to see in. The canopies will 2 match as well as the wall sconces. It will give the feeling that it is a four-sided building. 3 4 Mayor Faust noted that without the amendment to the Developer's Agreement,the variances are 5 needless to approve. He stated these request should be held. The request for the Amendment to 6 the Developer's Agreement,Item VII. A. must be moved up to the next item for discussion. 7 8 VII. GENERAL BUSINESS OF COUNCIL 9 A. Resolution 05-069; Amendment to developer's agreement with Amcon St. Anthony. 10 Mr. Morrison explained a letter was presented to him before the meeting that states the applicant 11 will provide the City with$50,000 to amend the Agreement. He said he had a letter from legal 12 counsel that outlines the City's options. He noted eight resolutions were prepared for 13 consideration for this item. 14 15 Councilmember Horst questioned if the agreement is amended as stated, whether the developer 16 would have eight months to complete the project with the same kind of terms that the City would 17 take the property back if this provision isn't met. Mr. Morrison said this is something that could 18 be negotiated. It is not stated now. 19 20 Councilmember Horst said that based on the track record, it should be included. Mr. Morrison 21 said that if the Council chooses to proceed on that, it should be included in the motion and 22 specific terms should be noted. 23 24 Councilmember Gray asked for an explanation for the difference of$50,000 being offered now 25 and$150,000 offered in June to amend the agreement. Mr. Tucci explained in June they were 26 asking for a major modification. Now they are back to the originally approved plan,basically. 27 He said they had a discussion with Ehlers on the reduced tax amount to the City due to the 28 building size, and the impact was under$1,000 per year. They tried to estimate what the tax 29 implication was and determined the amount of$ 50,000. The taxes should have already been 30 paid for a year on this project. 31 32 Mr. Tucci explained in regards to landscaping with this building they have an integrated 33 landscape plan to integrate what the City will do in the right of way. At the Planning 34 Commission meeting, there was discussion that the developer needs to make sure the sidewalk 35 going around the building connects. That was left to discussion with Staff. He suggested that 36 Guy with Village Pub can explain further. He said they learned from the last proposal that this 37 body seems to have a preference to have the restaurant on the pad where it was first approved. 38 They also learned that the Council was concerned that it would become more of a pub at 3,500 39 square feet. At 6,000 square feet, it seemed too big for a restaurant, so they now arrived at a size 40 of 4,500 square feet. He said they will specify in the lease that a 50/50 ratio of liquor and food 41 sales must be maintained. The architect is ready to start drawings tomorrow if this is approved. 42 He said he would like to begin the site prep work tomorrow. He noted the condition of having 43 the project complete in eight months was an oversight on his part. 44 45 Bob Foster, attorney for applicant and resident, said he asked Guy Peterson of Jackson Street Bar 46 and Grill to attend the meeting. He invited Mr. Peterson to explain why it will be a 47 neighborhood restaurant rather than a bar. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes August 23, 2005 Page 7 1 2 Mr. Guy Peterson, applicant, said the restaurant will look more like an Applebee's. He noted 3 that a 50% food/liquor ratio must be kept by St. Anthony ordinance. He said his goal is to have 4 the building look like a restaurant and not a bar. 5 6 Councilmember Horst said he is concerned about it being in a shopping center location. In the 7 last discussion you were planning on a pub atmosphere. Now, it is planned to look more like an 8 Applebee's. He asked how he plans to accomplish that, and how much will be spent for the 9 interior improvements. Mr. Peterson responded the interior will cost approximately $300,000. 10 The bar seating is very small. The inside will be very open and lighted. He said by contrast, the 11 Jackson Street Bar&Grill has a long bar. He said they never proposed to put a Jackson Street 12 Bar&Grill there. He further noted they were limited to what they could put in the Jackson 13 Street Bar and Grill because it was an old hardware store. 14 15 Councilmember Horst said he was concerned that it should look people friendly. He said 16 $300,000 seems like a low budget. Mr. Peterson said he will do a lot of the work. He agreed the 17 amount is on the low end. He said he will do a lot of work themselves because they are also a 18 construction company. 19 20 Mr. Tucci added that Mr. Peterson's $300,000 is above what they are putting into the base 21 building. 22 23 Councilmember Horst asked if they have an idea of what the restaurant will look like. Mr. Tucci 24 answered they do. The upgrading of the HVAC, electrical, etc. is all in the basic package. For 25 this type of operation, $300,000 is on the low side, but with Mr. Peterson doing their own work, 26 the amount is average. 27 28 Councilmember Horst said he was concerned that it will look cheap with cheap furnishings. Mr. 29 Peterson said the inside will be all wood. 30 31 Councilmember Horst said what he saw at the Jackson Street Bar and Grill is not up to the City's 32 standards. He said he wants to see this location be more upscale. 33 34 Mr. Peterson said there will be dark redwood inside and it will be a more upscale type restaurant. 35 He offered to provide samples. He added that the floor will be 12"x 12" ceramic tile. 36 37 Councilmember Gray pointed out that the proposal states the operator would have the option to 38 cancel the lease with the Sports Boosters if it drives the food ration below the 50%minimum. 39 Mr. Peterson said if they are under 50%, they would not be operating. 40 41 Councilmember Gray asked how that would be determined. 42 43 Mr. Foster said it seemed clear that the concern was this be an upscale restaurant. He stated that 44 one of their concerns was that including the pull tab operation in there is historically in other 45 places more of a bar crowd than a restaurant crowd. He said their first priority is to have this be 46 a restaurant rather than a bar. If it is a successful pull tab operation, this may cause it to be more 47 of a bar than a restaurant. He said they were caught in a Catch-22. The priority will be to make City Council Regular Meeting Minutes August 23,2005 Page 8 1 this a restaurant and as a result,they were concerned that the pull tab operation may suffer. He 2 said they felt they had to choose to stress the restaurant. 3 4 Mayor Faust said if this were the original plan we wouldn't be here discussing this. He said the 5 Catch-22 is one they created. The developer brought that on themselves. 6 7 Mr. Foster said if this were a Spectators, in a lot of their locations, they are more of a bar than a 8 restaurant. In St. Anthony,they would not allow that. Many of those that play pull tabs are 9 more bar patrons than restaurant patrons. They had to meet the 50% food ratio. 10 11 Mayor Faust commented that restaurant operations at 6,000 square feet do not have the issue of 12 bar vs. food issues. 13 14 Councilmember Horst stated the issue of pull tabs seems to be unenforceable. He said the 15 applicant is stating intentions of making the bar sales secondary. The pull tabs will either be a 16 success or the Sports Boosters will find a different location. He questioned whether the fact that 17 pull tabs will be in the location is part of the agreement at all. 18 19 Mr. Tucci said he drafted that letter. He wanted to make the point that when he negotiates the 20 lease with the Sports Boosters, the option will be there in the event that it becomes an issue with 21 the owner, or the Council. He said they want this to be a restaurant first, and not a bar first. He 22 offered to change the language. 23 24 Councilmember Stille stated all Councilmembers are familiar with the Jackson Street Bar& Grill 25 in Anoka. He asked what other restaurants Mr. Peterson owned. Mr. Peterson replied they have 26 another restaurant and grill in Oak Grove. He stated they have not done anything like this 27 before, and they are trying to expand. 28 29 Mayor Faust asked if the basement is used at the Jackson Street Bar& Grill. Mr. Peterson said it 30 houses the office, walk in cooler, and the freezers. 31 32 Mayor Faust asked if the other bar they own is the SRO. Mr. Peterson confirmed it is. 33 34 Mayor Faust noted that all of Anoka County allows smoking. Hennepin County is having a 35 debate. Mayor Faust said he does like the fact that no smoking is allowed. He added that the 36 City may take up some kind of smoking ban if Hennepin County relents. However, he said he 37 doesn't see any sentiment to change to go to smoking now. 38 39 Mayor Faust indicated there are two proposals for the amendment; one to approve the change to 40 the Amendment and one to deny. 41 42 Discussion 43 Councilmember Horst stated the City has been working on this for almost two years. Amcon has 44 been a good partner in creating at least some activity and at least a start of what will be 45 redevelopment on this end of the city. He said he thinks it is time for this proposal, and it is one 46 that we've wanted them to do all along except for the 1,500 feet. He said he thinks it is time this City Council Regular Meeting Minutes August 23, 2005 Page 9 1 project come to completion. He urged the Council to accept this Development Agreement 2 change and work with Amcon in creating the shopping center. 3 4 Councilmember Stille related the story of Spectators in 2003. He said he has heard a lot of this 5 before as far as permits being applied for and the lease being almost ready to sign. He said he 6 would like to see what is out there in terms of options and opening up for a Request for Proposal. 7 He said the City has come this far and should see what other options are there. He is concerned 8 that the operator has not done this before, and is concerned it could revert back to a bar. He 9 would encourage this applicant to participate in the RFP. 10 11 Councilmember Thuesen said he was glad to hear this would be a neighborhood restaurant vs. a 12 neighborhood bar. He said this cannot be emphasized enough. The establishment being run in 13 Anoka is a different time and place, and he said he is willing to recognize that. He said he 14 believes the operator that wants to build this establishment understands what we are looking for. 15 This process to this point has been painful. He said he is leaning toward approving this 16 operation. He added that he thinks the potential is there for a neighborhood restaurant. 17 18 Councilmember Gray agreed with Councilmembers Horst and Thuesen; he said he thinks it is 19 time to get going. He said he likes the concept and believes it will be a good neighborhood 20 restaurant. This is within walking distance from many residential units and apartments. He 21 noted he has heard from apartment residents that they would like to have something to walk to. 22 The developer is willing to pay the difference on taxes, and he thinks the Council should 23 proceed. 24 25 Mayor Faust indicated he did not feel an obligation to do anything for the sake of speed. He said 26 there is a reason there is a Developer's Agreement. We are at the 11`h hour of the second 27 extension with the Developer's Agreement. He stated he didn't find that Amcon, or whomever 28 the operator is has been forthright with the Council. He said he would like to see what is out 29 there as well. He said he doesn't doubt Mr. Peterson's ability to do what he does. Jackson Street 30 Bar and Grill is a bar and SRO is a greater bar. He commented he heard that 6,000 square feet is 31 the size needed to run a restaurant with a liquor operation. He said he has been told that 32 Applebee's has a 6,000 square foot building. He indicated that 3,900 square feet on the main 33 floor plus a basement is used for the Jackson Street Bar, so it is evident he uses more than 4,500 34 square feet at that location. He also stated there has been time to provide sketches since June. 35 This Developer's Agreement has been trusted for two years. Now he said he would be inclined 36 to take possession of the land and would prefer to direct the City Attorney to do that. 37 38 Councilmember Horst noted that when this proposal was first created, it was because the City 39 went out for bids for proposals. No one came forward right away. The first company that came 40 forward was rejected due to a report by Ehlers. Ehlers found other developers that were 41 interested, including Amcon. Amcon is one of the top developers in the Cities and they are well 42 respected. He said he cannot explain the lack of communication in this project,but he said he 43 has faith in this operation. He said that if bids are requested again, there may not be a response, 44 and time will be wasted. He would like to keep this good partner. He said the City should stop 45 adversarial looking at Amcon and work with them. 46 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes August 23,2005 Page 10 1 Mayor Faust said that the reason there is a Developer's Agreement is because it is adversarial by 2 nature. He stated that we have not wasted time; they have. He said he is not willing to settle. 3 He added that it is a 6,000 square foot parcel by the Developer's Agreement and not 4,500 4 square feet. 5 6 Councilmember Stille said we could put the project back out there. The market may dictate that 7 a restaurant does not belong on that site. He said he would like to see what the market says. 8 9 Councilmember Horst said the fact that no one else wants to put a restaurant on that site doesn't 10 mean a restaurant doesn't belong there. It means to him that no one wants a 4,500 square foot 11 parcel. He said we have gone far down the road with this group; let them finish their work. 12 13 Motion by Councilmember Horst, seconded by Councilmember Gray, to adopt Resolution 05- 14 069, re: Amendment to the Development Agreement between City of St. Anthony and Amcon, 15 LLC. with payment of$50,000 to the City upon issuance of a permit. 16 17 Councilmember Thuesen requested clarification of the issue in front of them. 18 19 Mr. Tucci explained the $50,000 payment is upon execution of the amendment. He said they 20 would have approximately six weeks to file for a building permit and then eight months from the 21 approval of the permit to get the building done. If this is approved tonight,he said they are ready 22 to start the plans tomorrow. 23 24 Councilmember Horst asked if he was publicly stating that should this Developer's Agreement 25 be amended, he will lease this and it will work out. Mr. Peterson confirmed it will work out. 26 27 Mr. Mornson suggested specific dates be included in the Developer's Agreement. He reminded 28 the Council and the applicants that they must apply for a liquor license. 29 30 Councilmember Horst suggested removing the"whereas"point on the Resolution regarding the 31 pull tab operations. This point is in the Developer's Agreement. 32 33 Councilmember Stille raised the issue of the sixth"whereas"point regarding the issuance of 34 issuance of a building permit. Mr. Gilligan stated the building must have a certificate of 35 occupancy by June 1, 2006 and the Resolution should be changed to reflect this. 36 37 Ayes—3,Nays—2 (Stifle and Mayor Faust). Motion carried. 38 39 D. Consider Resolution 05-066 re: Adopt Variance for building setback Amcon St. Anthony 40 (continued). 41 Motion by Councilmember Horst, seconded by Councilmember Thuesen,to adopt Resolution 42 05-066,re: Approving a variance for building setback for the development located at 2900 43 Kenzie Terrace. 44 45 Ayes—3,Nays—2 (Stille and Mayor Faust). Motion carried. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes August 23, 2005 Page 11 1 2 E. Consider Resolution 05-067,re Variance for parking Amcon St. Anthony. 3 Motion by Councilmember Gray, seconded by Councilmember Horst, to adopt Resolution OS- 4 067,re: Approving a variance for parking for the development located at 2900 Kenzie Terrace. 5 6 Discussion: ously approved at the Planning Commission. He 7 Councilmember Horst pointed out was unanim 8 said he doesn't know any reason to go against this particular resolution. 9 10 Aves 3,Nays 2 (Stille and Mayor Faust) Motion carried. 11 12 13 F. Consider Resolution 05-068 re: Conditional Use Permit for restaurant within 250 feet of 14 residential property at 2900 Kenzie Terrace/Highway 88. 15 Councilmember Stille asked for the attorney's thoughts on this issue. 16 17 Mr. Gilligan said he would check the statutes for the 60-day rule. He noted the 60 days expire 18 September 7. 19 20 Motion by Councilmember Horst, seconded by Councilmember Gray, to adopt Resolution 05- 21 068,re: Approving a conditional use permit to allow a restaurant within 250 feet of a residential 22 property for the development located at 2714 Highway 88. 23 24 Discussion 25 Councilmember Stille said there is a Developer's Agreement that has been approved. Since that 26 is the case,he said he believes the Council should move forward with the Conditional Use 27 Permit. It is difficult to regulate who goes into this. 28 29 Councilmember Horst noted the Conditional Use Permit was argued a long time at the Planning 30 Commission. They did make sure a lot of the conditions the City wanted to see were met. He 31 said he thinks it is the right thing to move forward. 32 33 Mayor Faust said he will vote more as a protest. He said the applicants should take that vote as a 34 lack of overwhelming confidence. The burden is on the developer to see this through. 35 36 Ayes 4,Nays—1 (Mayor Faust) Motion carried. 37 38 B. Resolution 05-070; Re: Approve the feasibility report for 2006 street improvements. 39 Mr. Hubmer reviewed the streets to be improved. He noted storm water improvements are 40 proposed. The proposed project costs for 2006 street reconstruction are $1,132,000. The City 41 assessment roll is that 35%would be assessed to the property owners. Sanitary improvements 42 are assessed for$96,000,which would be a city expenditure. Total assessments will be 43 approximately $1.7 million for a total project cost. He went over the anticipated project 44 schedule. He said they anticipate holding a neighborhood meeting in September 2005 and 45 receiving feedback. In October,he said they anticipate bringing plans back to the Council. The 46 bids will be received in December, and brought to the Council for approval in January of 2006. 47 Construction will begin in May of 2006. Some final project work may be done in June 2007. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes August 23, 2005 Page 12 1 2 Councilmember Thuesen questioned how it would be staged as far as phasing. Mr. Hubmer 3 explained he would like to complete the work on 29th Avenue first. It is a busy street and they 4 would like to keep the construction vehicles away from crossing this street continuously. There 5 are many accesses to Murry Ave. from other streets. 6 7 Councilmember Thuesen asked what the cost was of this year's project. Mr. Hubmer answered 8 they anticipated the cost to be approximately$ 1.9 million. He added that the length is less but 9 there were more substantial utility replacements. 10 11 Motion by Councilmember Gray seconded by Councilmember Stille to approve resolution 05- 12 070; re: A resolution receiving report and ordering plans and specifications. 13 Motion carried unanimously. 14 — 15 16 C. Resolution 05 071 Change the regularly scheduled December Council meetings from 17 second and fourth Tuesday to the first and third Monday. 18 Mr. Mornson explained this is a resolution to change the meeting dates of the Council in 19 December to coincide with a Resolution that will be presented at the September 13 meeting. The 20 meetings must coincide with the Truth in Taxation hearings according to state mandate. 21 22 Motion by Councilmember Thuesen, seconded by Councilmember Horst, to approve Resolution 23 05-071; re: A Resolution canceling the City Council meetings scheduled for the second and 24 fourth Tuesday and replacing with the first and third Monday in the month of December. 25 26 VIII. REPORTS FROM CITY MANAGER AND COUNCILMEMBERS. 27 City Manager Morrison reported the following: 28 . The St. Anthony Chamber will hold an event called Silver Lake Village October Fest on 29 October 8 from 3:00 to 9:00 p.m. They will request a liquor license for sales during this 30 time. The Chamber will pay for additional restroom facilities. 31 • The Park Commission is working with a consulting company for a feasibility study on 32 Emerald Park. They will likely hold a neighborhood meeting to solicit input. 33 • Negotiations have begun with Nextel on the water tower. There is a possibility of 34 $16,000 in annual revenue. 35 • Three public hearings in September for Planning Commission. 36 • The Fire Department is creating IDs to comply with the NIMS. He said the 37 Councilmembers must go to the Fire Station for their pictures. 38 . The Fire Department is planning a pancake breakfast on October 9. 39 • Public Works finished hydrant flushing and seal coating. 40 0 Finance just completed an audit and will be getting a refund check based on being injury 41 free for the past year. 42 • Police interviews will be conducted Monday. 43 • Liquor sales are up at both stores. 44 45 Councilmember Horst asked if we have a planned date for completion of the current street 46 improvements. Mr. Hubmer answered 39`h Avenue is anticipated to be completed by the first of 47 October. The project is on schedule. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes August 23, 2005 Page 13 1 ed Mr. Morrison talk to the County Assessor's office regarding the going 2 Mayor Faust suggest 3 rate for Nextel. 4 He 5 Councilmember Gray attended the Silver Lake Task Force meeting��previous e sla concern that is 1 6 no one was in favor of a four-lane extension from Ramsey County, ard,this will not be the assumption that it will happen. 7 regularly brought up. Going forw 8 st attended the Silver Lake Task Force as well. He invited residents to bring 9 Councilmember Hor 10 concerns to himself or Councilmember Gray. 11 12 Councilmember Stille had no report. 13Library Task Force meetings since the 14 Councilmember Thuesen attended two Ramsey County 15 last Council meeting. He said it was good a ° He said he thinks itis important that tt task force. he end e 16 to forget that St. Anthony is part of Ramsey ty. 17 City have a say in this task force. There He recomml be three ended that a School Boahall rd Member attens: September d these 18 September 20, and September 19 meetings. He encouraged all residents of St. Anthony to attend. 20 d he attended 21 Mayor Faust reportean Association of Minnesota Municipalities. He also attende 22 the kick off r the Silver Lake Task Force the previous night. He noted Hennepin County 23 Commissioner Stenglein was there. He said without him, this project would not be going 24 forward. 25 26 VIII. COMMUNITY FORUM. 27 Mayor Faust invited residents to come forward at this time and address the Council on items that 28 are not on the regular agenda. 29 30 Hearing none, Mayor Faust moved forward with the agenda. 31 32 IX. INFORMATION AND ANNOUNCEMENTS. 33 Councilmember Stille stated he attended the fundraiser at Applebee's pancake breakfast. 34 Applebee's wishes to do this for more organizations. 35 36 Councilmember Stille noted Wilshire Auto Sales looks to be out of business and he thanked 37 Councilmember Gray for spearheading that. He thanked the Staff for assisting in that. 38 39 X. MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATIONAL DOCUMENTS. 40 None. 41 42 XI. ADJOURNMENT. 43 Mayor Faust adjourned the meeting at 9:22 p.m. 44 4 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 20, 2005 Page 1 1 CITY OF ST. ANTHONY 2 3 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 4 5 September 20, 2005 6 7:00 p.m. 7 8 9 I. CALL TO ORDER. 10 Chair Stromgren called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 11 12 II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. 13 Chair Stromgren invited the Commission and the audience to join in the Pledge of Allegiance. 14 15 III. ROLL CALL. 16 Commissioners present: Chair Stromgren; Vice Chair Hanson; Commissioners Galyon, 17 Hoska, Jensen, Jenson, and Young. 18 19 Absent: 20 Also present: Assistant City Manager Kim Moore-Sykes. 21 22 IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 23 24 Motion by Vice Chair Hanson, second by Commissioner Young, to approve the meeting agenda 25 as presented. 26 27 Motion carried unanimously 28 29 V. MEETING MINUTES. 30 5.1 Review and Approve Planning Commission Minutes of August 16 2005 31 32 The Commission had the following corrections to the minutes: 33 34 Commissioner Galyon: 35 • Page 7, Line 3, reads: `egr4ess'; should be `egress'. 36 • Page 8, Line 22, should read `a new driveway `to the' garage'. 37 38 Commissioner Young: 39 • Page 15, Line 10, reads `live-saving'; should read `life-saving'. 40 41 Chair Stromgren: 42 • Page 12, line 29, 2-foot should read 2-hour. 43 44 Commissioner Jenson: 45 0 Page 11, line 25, reads `Commissioner Jensen'; should read Commissioner Jenson'. t 1 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 20, 2005 Page 2 1 2 Motion by Vice Chair Hanson, second by Commissioner Jensen, to approve the meeting minutes 3 of the Planning Commission of August 16, 2005 as amended. 4 5 Motion carried unanimously 6 7 VI. COMMUNICATION WITH CITY COUNCIL. 8 6.1 Designate a Planning Commission member to the September 27 2005 City Council 9 Meeting. 10 11 Chair Stromgren stated that he and Ms. Moore-Sykes would discuss the Planning Commission 12 representative for the September 27, 2005 City Council meeting at a later time. 13 14 VII. PUBLIC HEARING. 15 16 7.1 Conditional Use Permit—49er's Catering Services 2829 Anthony Lane South 17 18 Chair Stromgren opened the public hearing at 7:10 p.m. 19 20 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that Eric Reiners, an architect with Welman, Sperides Architects, 21 representatives for Local 49, is present as a representative for the Local 49er's to answer any 22 questions the Planning Commission might have regarding their application for a Conditional Use 23 Permit. She provided the Commission with a brief overview noting that the Local 49er's had 24 recently completed construction of a catering kitchen and related facilities, which they are 25 interested in opening to the public for weddings and special events. She stated that the 26 application had been reviewed previously by City Council but because the City's zoning 27 ordinance did not allow this use in the Industrial Zoning District the Local 49er's petitioned the 28 Council requesting that the Ordinance at Section 1640.03 be amended to allow catering as a 29 permitted conditional use in the Industrial Zoning District. She stated that the City Council 30 approved the amendment at their August 23, 2005 meeting and the applicant is now requesting a 31 public hearing to consider graining a Conditional Use Permit for their catering services. She 32 stated that they reviewed potential traffic impacts and it was determined that allowing the 33 services would not have additional impact to the area. She stated that Staff has outlined five 34 conditions and reviewed with the Commission. 35 36 Mike Freeburg, Pohlman Freese, stated that Mr. Reiners was not able to attend this evening 37 adding that he was asked, on short notice, to represent the International Union of Operating 38 Engineers, Local 49, in his place. He explained that he is not actually involved in this project but 39 assured the Commission that he would do his best to answer their questions. He indicated that 40 the parking issues have been resolved and assured the Commission that they would be in 41 compliance with all outlined requirements and conditions. 42 43 Chair Stromgren closed the public hearing at 7:12 p.m. 44 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 20, 2005 Page 3 1 Commissioner Jensen referenced Condition 3, which states that there would be no cooking of 2 food on site and asked if there is any possibility of cooking actually taking place anywhere on the 3 site. 4 5 Ms. Moore-Sykes assured the Commission that there would be no cooking of food on this site as 6 there are no actual cooking facilities, such as a stove, convection oven or grill, located at the site. 7 8 Chair Stromgren further clarified stating that approval hinges on the design of the kitchen and 9 compliance with Health Department standards. He stated that based on the equipment they have 10 on site there is no issue with regards to what they would be able to do outside of warming 11 prepared food. 12 13 Vice Chair Hanson asked if they should include a section that would clarify and outline the hours 14 of operation for the facility. 15 16 Commissioner Jensen stated that the hours of operation for facilities in an industrial zone are not 17 usually regulated and asked what it would prevent. 18 19 Chair Stromgren stated that it could be included as a condition noting that the liquor licensing 20 would help to govern the hours of operation for the facility. 21 22 Motion by Commissioner Jensen, second by Vice Chair Hanson, to recommend approval of the 23 Conditional Use Permit for catering activities at 2829 Anthony Lane South as submitted. 24 25 Chair Stromgren stated that he would like to add a friendly amendment to restrict the hours of 26 operation to 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 a.m. 27 28 Motion by Chair Stromgren, second by Commissioner Jenson, to accept the proposed friendly 29 amendment as Condition 7 to state that the hours of operation are restricted to 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 30 a.m. 31 32 Commissioner Jensen accepted the friendly amendment. 33 34 Motion carried unanimously 35 36 7.2 Conditional User Permit Request—Drive-through for Snyder's Drugs 37 38 Chair Stromgren opened the public hearing at 7:17 p.m. 39 40 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that the City received a request from David Leonard, Snyder's Drug 41 Stores, Inc., for a Conditional Use Permit for a drive-through window, as required by the City's 42 Zoning Code. She provided the Commission with a brief overview of the request noting that Mr. 43 Leonard appeared before the Planning Commission in a concept review at their August 16, 2005 44 meeting, proposing to move Snyder's Drug Store from its current location in the St. Anthony 45 Shopping Center to the end cap unit in the St. Anthony Marketplace. She explained that Mr. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 20, 2005 Page 4 1 Leonard has indicated that the lease at their current location is up soon and since the current site 2 no longer fits their needs they became interested in the St. Anthony Marketplace unit when they 3 were told that it was available. She further explained that Mr. Leonard found this location 4 attractive because it is an end cap and they could easily install a drive-through for the 5 convenience of the physically challenged customers and parents with small children. She stated 6 that the Planning Commission had discussed the traffic flow of the proposed drive-through 7 window and it was suggested that to alleviate traffic issues that the proposed drive-through be a 8 one-way. She reviewed the proposed conditions with the Commission 9 10 David Leonard, Snyder's Drug Store, Inc., referenced the no-canopy condition stating that they 11 had discussed and agreed to a small canopy over the window and explained that the intent is to 12 protect employees from inclement weather. 13 14 Ms. Moore-Sykes confirmed adding that it was also noted in the minutes. 15 16 Commissioner Jensen clarified that the hours of operation for the drive-through would correlate 17 to the hours of operation for the pharmacy. 18 19 Mr. Leonard confirmed that the hours of operation for the drive-through would correlate with the 20 pharmacy noting that the pharmacy hours would be shorter than the regular store hours. He 21 stated that there is an understanding that the store would be open two hours later than the 22 pharmacy. 23 24 Chair Stromgren closed the public hearing at 7:23 p.m. 25 26 Commissioner Jenson asked that Item 3 be amended to reflect the hours of operation. 27 28 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that she has made note of the hours of operation and assured the 29 Commission that the conditions would be amended to reflect the hours of operation for the drive- 30 through. 31 32 Chair Stromgren referenced Item 2, which addresses the flow of traffic and asked to include a 33 statement that would direct traffic in a southbound direction to avoid headlight reflection into the 34 neighboring residential areas. 35 36 Motion by Commissioner Jensen, second by Commissioner Hoska, to recommend approval of 37 the Conditional Use Permit for a drive-through window at the Snyder's Drug Store as submitted 38 with amendments to Condition 1 to allow for a minor canopy over the receiving box location; 39 Condition 2, orient the drive-through traffic to a one-way, southbound flow pattern to minimize 40 potential traffic conflicts; Condition 3, hours of drive-through operation would be limited to 9:00 41 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.; and Condition 4, as submitted by staff. 42 43 Chair Stromgren submitted a friendly amendment to insert the requirement of a 4-foot maximum 44 overhang for the canopy. 45 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 20, 2005 Page 5 1 Commissioner Jensen accepted the friendly amendment. 2 3 Motion carried unanimously 4 5 7.3 R-2 Rezoning Request for 3645 Chelmsford Road 6 7 8 Chair Stromgren opened the public hearing at 7:26 p.m. 9 10 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that the applicant, Troy Martenson, is not present and asked the 11 Commission if they would prefer to table this discussion until the applicant arrives or would they 12 prefer to move forward with the report. 13 14 The Commission agreed to move forward with the report. 15 16 Ms. Moore-Sykes proved the Commission with a brief overview of the request stating that Staff 17 is asking the Planning Commission to consider a request by Troy Martenson, owner of 3645 18 Chelmsford Road to rezone the property from R-1 Single-Family Zoning District to R-2 Two- 19 Family Zoning District. She stated that the property is currently zoned R-1 with an existing 20 single-family structure on the lot. She noted that it is a corner lot with a 75-foot utility easement 21 given to Xcel Energy that goes across the northern portion of the lot. She stated that the property 22 adjacent to the east is zoned R-2 and the properties directly across 37ffi Avenue to the north from 23 the property are zoned R-4. She stated that there have been several attempts to split this lot but 24 because of the utility easement, the requests have either been denied by the City or upon 25 discovering the easement, the petitioners cancelled their applications. She stated that the current 26 owner also went before the City Council at its June 21, 2005 meeting with a petition for an R-3 27 Townhouse Zoning District rezoning request adding that Council denied the request due to 28 concerns about spot zoning. She stated that Mr. Martenson is now proposing to submit a 29 rezoning request that would change the current zoning of R-1 to R-2 and presented his concept to 30 the Planning Commission at a concept review at the July 19, 2005 meeting. She noted that the 31 property adjacent to the subject property is currently zoned R-2, despite its current structure 32 being used as a single-family residence. She explained that the R-2 Zoning District requires that 33 a corner lot have an area of 14,000 square feet and 100 feet in width at the building setback line 34 and based on two different sources, staff has varying information about the square footage of the 35 subject lot. She stated that the plat map that the City receives from Hennepin County shows that 36 the lot is 23,540 square feet, while the information from the Hennepin County's web site shows 37 the lot is 19,260 square feet. She stated that an enclosed copy of a survey of the lot shows an 18- 38 foot by 220-foot roadway easement that accounts for the discrepancy in the square footages 39 adding that this lot conforms with the area and width as required by the City's Zoning Ordinance 40 for an R-2 designation. She noted that a letter from Xcel Energy is included with the application 41 that states that they are comfortable with a driveway over the easement as long as it does not 42 disrupt the easement too much. 43 44 Chair Stromgren suggested closely the public hearing since the applicant is not present to address 45 this request. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 20, 2005 Page 6 1 2 Chair Stromgren closed the public hearing at 7:29 p.m. 3 4 Motion by Chair Stromgren, second by Commissioner Young, to recommend denial of the 5 proposed request to rezone the property located at 3645 Chelmsford Road from an R-1 Single- 6 Family Zoning District to an R-2, Two-Family Zoning District because the applicant failed to 7 attend the Planning Commission meeting and public hearing and because the requested changes 8 have not been made to the proposal since the concept review. 9 10 Motion carried unanimously 11 12 7.4 Proposed Text Amendment to the City Code to Allow Egress Window Wells Encroach 13 into Side Yard Setback 14 15 Chair Stromgren opened the public hearing at 7:30 p.m. 16 17 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that this is a request to consider a proposed text amendment to the City's 18 Zoning Code to allow egress window wells as encroachment no more than 3 feet into the side 19 yard or front yard setback. She provided the Commission with a brief overview stating that by 20 omission from the St. Anthony Zoning Code, egress window wells are not a permitted use or 21 allowed as an encroachment into the side yard setback of the R-1 Zoning District. She stated that 22 Section 1600.03, Uses Not Specified, states that if a use is not specifically permitted, permitted 23 by conditional use permit or prohibited, the use will be considered prohibited and Section 24 1650.03, Encroachments in Yards, does not include egress window wells as an allowed 25 encroachment. She stated that staff received several requests this summer from residents asking 26 to be allowed to install egress window wells in the setbacks and in many situations the yard was 27 generally sufficient to allow for the installation without going into the setback, side yard or front 28 yard areas. She noted that in these situations the Building Inspector and Fire Marshall would 29 oversee the installation to ensure proper placement and dimensions, as required by the building 30 code. 31 32 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that Staff did some research to determine how other Cities address this 33 issue noting that all the Cities that responded to Staff s requests for information indicated that 34 they do not have anything in their zoning ordinances that specifically address egress windows in 35 the setback because it's more of a safety issue. She stated that as such, egress window wells are 36 basically allowed by their City's policy and usually without the zoning department's 37 consideration. She noted that all stated that building permits are required for egr4ess window 38 wells construction so that the Building Inspector and Fire Marshall can review the building plans. 39 She noted that the Cities of Minneapolis, St. Paul, Blaine, Hopkins,New Brighton and 40 Lexington have adopted policies that are based on the Minnesota Building Codes for 41 encroachments into the side or front yard for egress window wells. She stated that in speaking 42 with the Planning and Zoning Departments for the Cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul, they both 43 indicated that egress window wells are allowed no matter what because it's an issue of safety for 44 both the resident and emergency response personnel. She indicated that Michelle Howard of the 45 Minneapolis Planning and Zoning Department said that they viewed the installation of egress Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 20, 2005 Page 7 1 window wells the same as St. Paul and that both Cities have side yard setbacks on some 2 properties that are three to four feet from the property lines. She noted that they also view egress 3 window wells as always allowable because of the safety issues that they address. She stated that 4 Ms. Howard, as did the planner from St. Paul, stated that they have never required property 5 owners to attend public hearings on their requests to prove hardship or to consider economic gain 6 as an impediment to the allowance and construction of these structures. She stated that it is 7 considered simply a matter of safety and they can be installed without planning and zoning 8 review. She stated that it appears to be the same procedure for other Cities that Staff contacted. 9 10 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that Staff also requested memos from the Building Official and the St. 11 Anthony fire Department regarding egress window wells noting that the memos were received 12 and included their feedback. She stated that since Staff did not find any ordinance language 13 dealing with egress window wells from other metro communities simply adding egress window 14 wells to the already existing ordinance text would be the easiest text amendment and reviewed 15 the proposed text changes with the Commission. 16 17 Ramona Steadman, 2909 30'x'Avenue, stated that she would be in favor of the proposed text 18 amendment as long as the side yard and rear yard areas are preserved. She shared her experience 19 in trying to get an egress window well installed in their home with the Commission. She 20 explained that Staff had informed her that they would need a variance due to side yard setback 21 requirements. She indicated that they began this process in June and they still do not have an 22 egress window well installed. She expressed concerns stating that all they want is a safe area for 23 their daughter. She noted that surrounding Cities do not require this kind of process adding that 24 it is her hope that the Commission recommends approval as it saves lives. 25 26 Chair Stromgren closed the public hearing at 7:38 p.m. 27 28 Chair Stromgren clarified that the only question here is whether they make it a staff level 29 approval process or do they make it a conditional use permit process to allow for closer review 30 for unique conditions. He stated that there is argument for both ways noting that he does agree 31 with the Building Official in that they do not want to make the process overly cumbersome and 32 discourage people from following through with getting the proper permits. He stated that there 33 are instances where safety could be an issue and should be considered. 34 35 Commissioner Jensen agreed noting that building permits can include specific stipulations that 36 are available and easily resolved, accepted or disputed by the applicant without having to get 37 involved in a governmental permit process, as required by a conditional use permit. He stated 38 that he would trust a text amendment that would include a requirement of approval by the 39 Building Official. He stated that he would advocate not making it a permit process that would 40 require a Planning Commission timetables. 41 42 Commissioner Young clarified that the permit could trigger inspections by the Building Inspector 43 and Fire Marshal adding that the packet clearly stated that it would trigger inspections. She 44 stated that this is a big difference and asked that this be clearly explained. 45 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 20, 2005 Page 8 1 Ms. Moore-Sykes acknowledged the differences and agreed that there is a big difference. She 2 assured the Commission that the Building Official and the Fire Marshall work closely on these 3 requests and do review the issues closes for stormwater and safety issues. 4 5 Commissioner Galyon stated that he understands the arguments for adding the text amendment 6 noting that as a person who lives in the City of St. Anthony and understanding the impracticality 7 of the situation for the applicant, the conditional use permit is not a rigorous process noting that 8 it allows neighbors to come in and voice their opinion in regards to the window well location. 9 He noted that the third paragraph of the Fire Chief's memo notes that to place an egress window 10 close proximity to a stairway would be impractical in the event of a fire. He stated that all of 11 these concerns should be reviewed adding that he would be in favor of putting a review process 12 in place that would allow the opportunity to talk through the issues. He referenced the text 13 amendment noting that it states `as long as access to the rear yard is preserved' and asked what 14 this would mean in terms of access. He stated that the references to access should be further 15 clarified stating that it would make sense to have some form of process in place to review all 16 issues. He stated that the process could be changed in the future and further clarified as the move 17 forward. 18 19 Ms. Moore-Sykes explained that preserving rear yard access could mean access for utility repair, 20 maintenance for easement utilities or emergency vehicle access. She stated that a conditional use 21 permit process would be considerably more rigorous because it would require a four-fifths vote 22 and it would require a super majority to pass a conditional use permit. She stated that if the 23 Commission is looking for more planning oversight they could consider a permitting process 24 similar to what is used for garages in setbacks. She explained that it would involve a public 25 hearing but it only requires a simple majority. She stated that it would be a variance process for 26 the applicant. She asked the Commissioners to recognize that these processes do take time and 27 that this is a life safety issue that does not have that kind of time for consideration. 28 29 Commissioner Galyon acknowledged the safety concerns stating that there are several options 30 that could be considered adding that he would like to see some form of process included in the 31 ordinance that would help to regulate the installation and allow residents a forum to provide 32 feedback. He noted that the proposed text amendment is limited to R-1 and R-2 zoning and 33 asked how R-3 Zoning Districts would be handled. 34 35 Chair Stromgren explained that R-3 Zoning districts are considered separately due to their size 36 and because they would have alternate escape routes. 37 38 Commissioner Jenson stated that in the paragraph following the test amendment it states that the 39 permit would trigger inspections by the Building Inspectors and Fire Marshall, which would 40 provide oversight of the construction of the egress window well and setback. He referenced the 41 example given of the driveway next to the window well and the request to install a small safety 42 fence and asked if the building inspection process would have the ability to highlight a need for 43 something like this. 44 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 20, 2005 Page 9 1 Chair Stromgren stated that they could add a sub-condition that gives the Building Official the 2 authority to require fencing or guard rails for fall protection and life safety. 3 4 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that they should also keep in mind that driveways are not allowed in the 5 setback area. She explained that there is a minimum setback on one side of five feet and cannot 6 encroach the area. She stated that there is theoretically 7-feet between the side yard and 7 driveway, which would give reasonable space for safety. 8 9 Commissioner Galyon expressed concerns stating that he does not believe that the process would 10 be too rigorous for residents to come through. He asked that they explore other options to 11 provide residents with an opportunity or forum to express their opinions. He stated that the 12 numbers are not big enough to show that there is a big problem in this area adding that he does 13 agree that this is a life safety issue that should also be considered. He stated that he is not against 14 it adding that it should continue to be petitioned through a conditional use permit process. 15 16 Commissioner Hoska stated that he supports the text amendment as proposed noting that in being 17 a member of the Fire Department he finds himself in live saving situations where this is a true 18 asset and life saver. He stated that this is a safety issue and does not want the process to be too 19 cumbersome for the residents. He stated that he is sure that the Fire Marshall and Building 20 Official has enough sense to make sure that the fencing would be placed if safety issues are 21 identified. 22 23 Commissioner Galyon acknowledged Commissioner Hoska stating that he does appreciate his 24 views adding that he does not agree that keeping a permit process in place would impede the 25 process or impact safety. 26 27 Motion by Commissioner Jensen, second by Commissioner Jenson, to recommend approval of 28 the proposed text amendment to the City Code to allow egress window wells to encroach into the 29 side yard setbacks as proposed by Staff. 30 31 Chair Stromgren asked to include a friendly amendment to add a subsection granting authority to 32 the Building Official to require fencing, guard rails or similar fall protection to protect the public. 33 34 Chair Stromgren explained that his reason for the friendly amendment is because it is specifically 35 exempted from the building code and someone could challenge the decision if they do not give 36 the Building Official this tool. 37 38 Commissioner Jensen accepted the friendly amendment. 39 40 Ayes—6 Nays— 1 (Galyon) Motion carried 6-1. 41 42 7.5 Zoning Ordinance Amendment—Vehicle Sales Prohibited 43 44 Chair Stromgren opened the public hearing at 7:52 p.m. 45 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 20, 2005 Page 10 1 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that Staff has recently received several complaints from residents about 2 all the vehicles for sale at Wiltshire Park School parking lot. She stated that because this is not 3 listed as allowable in the Zoning Ordinance for any zoning district, selling vehicles in this 4 manner is not allowed. She stated that vehicles parked on public property or public right-of-way 5 would be cited and towed at the owner's expense. She explained that Wiltshire Park is 6 considered private property and as such, the police can only respond if and when there is a call 7 from the school staff. She further explained that the Police and the Public Works Department 8 have been working with the school staff to determine a resolution to this situation and as a result 9 of Staff discussion, she has received a copy of the City of Falcon Heights' ordinance regarding 10 vehicle sales. She stated that the ordinance language was used as an example of a possible 11 ordinance that the City could adopt to alleviate the situation. She stated that the proposed 12 language was sent to the City Attorney and the Police Department for their comments. She 13 stated that the Police Department has been working with the school board and that signs are now 14 posted in the area that states parking is not permitted in the area and would be enforced. She 15 reviewed the proposed text changes with the Commission. 16 17 Chair Stromgren closed the public hearing at 7:54 p.m. 18 19 Commissioner Jensen asked what the consequence would be if someone violates the posted signs 20 21 22 Ms. Moore-Sykes explained that this would give the Police Department the opportunity to cite 23 the individual or tow the vehicle if it is on private property, such as Wiltshire Park. 24 25 Commissioner Jenson asked if public property would include parking in front of a house or in a 26 driveway. 27 28 Ms. Moore-Sykes confirmed that parking in front of a house would be considered public property 29 and the vehicle would have to be pulled into the driveway. 30 31 Commissioner Jensen asked if this would also include all recreational vehicles. 32 33 Ms. Moore-Sykes confirmed that it would include recreational vehicles such as boats on trailers, 34 snowmobiles and four-wheelers. She explained that if the school has a vehicle for sale they 35 would be able to display the vehicle because they own the property but another individual would 36 not be able to park or display their vehicle on school property because they do not own the 37 property. She stated that the proposed ordinance clearly states that it does have to be the 38 residence of the resident where the vehicle is parked. She stated that the verbiage is very clear. 39 40 Motion by Commissioner Jenson, second by Commission Galyon, to recommend approval of the 41 proposed text amendment to the Zoning Ordinance as presented. 42 43 Motion carried unanimously 44 45 7.6 Administrative Subdivision of Property—Kenzie Terrace Properties Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 20, 2005 Page 1 I 1 2 Chair Stromgren opened the public hearing at 7:59 p.m. 3 4 Ms. Moore-Sykes reviewed the listed properties with the Commission noting that these are all 5 properties the City has acquired for redevelopment over the years that have been held by the City 6 until a buyer or project could be identified. She stated that in 1996, as part of their 7 redevelopment plan for this area, the City Council met with the owners to discuss the prospect of 8 acquiring these properties. She stated that by 2000 the City had acquired all of the properties and 9 that on October 29, 2004 the City sold all of the lots to Autumn Woods Partners, LLP. She 10 stated that as part of the agreement, the City agreed to combine these lots into one parcel and 11 record it with Hennepin County. 12 13 Paul Brewer, LaNel Properties, confirmed that the lots along Kenzie are all properties that they 14 purchased from the City and reviewed with the Commission. He stated that as part of Autumn 15 Woods they have a triangular parcel titled Parcel A and has been deeded and recorded with the 16 County. He stated that now, in order to prepare the parcel for development, they want to convey 17 Parcel A to a partnership that owns the parcels that would be eventually developed. He stated 18 that until they get a solid plan together for this area they do not want to apply for a subdivision of 19 the parcels and they are asking the City to waive the subdivision requirements so they can record 20 Parcel A as a separate parcel from the lots they purchased from the City. He stated that without 21 the City waiver they would have to subdivide the property. He stated that at this time they are 22 requesting that the Planning Commission waive the subdivision requirements allowing them to 23 record the deed for Parcel A and when they get to the point for a final development plan for the 24 site they would come back to present a formal subdivision plan for the site. 25 26 Chair Stromgren closed the public hearing at 8:05 p.m. 27 28 Motion by Commissioner Jensen, second by Commissioner Young, to recommend approval of 29 the proposed administrative subdivision of property located at 2534 Kenzie Terrace; 2538 Kenzie 30 Terrace; 2542 Kenzie Terrace; 2546 Kenzie Terrace and 2548 Kenzie Terrace and combine these 31 lots into one parcel and record it with Hennepin County as proposed by Staff. 32 33 Motion carried unanimously 34 35 VIII. CONCEPT REVIEW 36 37 8.1 Redevelopment of the Kenzie Terrace/Lowry Avenue Commercial Property located at 38 2520 Kenzie Terrace. 39 40 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that John Harriss, Harriss Architects, is representing a group of 41 developers that are interested in redeveloping 2520 Kenzie Terrace, which is the old KFC 42 commercial site. She stated that the parcel is currently zoned commercial and that their proposal 43 is to rezone the lot to an R-4 and construct an owner-occupied condominium with 33 units. She 44 explained that because of the size of the lot, they might also request a variance to the height 45 restriction to construct a 4-floor building. She noted that they have a similar project on Central Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 20, 2005 Page 12 1 Avenue and reviewed with the Commission. 2 3 John Harriss, Harriss Architects, stated there is great potential on this site noting that it is a 4 gateway to the community. He stated that when they reviewed the site a couple of things stood 5 out including the intersection at Kenzie Terrace and Lowry, which would provide a great 6 opportunity for green space and a pocket park. He stated that the property has two exposures 7 from Lowry and Kenzie Terrace noting that if the building were turned it would create a 8 formidable presence from both perspectives adding that the main entry would come in off Lowry. 9 He stated that they would also provide access to an underground parking area and a drop-off area 10 at the front of the building. He stated that the proposed building would be 4-stories above grade 11 with 66-spaces for parking, with most of the parking being underground. He explained that due 12 to the size of the footprint it would be necessary to extend the underground parking beyond the 13 building limits and reviewed with the Commission. He noted that the top of the parking area 14 would be a green-space area adding that no one would ever know that there is underground 15 parking in that area. He stated that the site is currently paved and it is their belief that they would 16 be helping the stormwater runoff by adding green space in this area. He reviewed the materials 17 for the proposed building noting that it would be primarily brick with stucco or stone accents, 18 similar to a current project of theirs on Central Avenue in Minneapolis. He stated that the units 19 would range from 1000 square feet to 1,400 square feet in size and assured the Commission that 20 it would not be age restrictive adding that it is their belief that the majority of individuals 21 interested would fit the empty nester profile. 22 23 Chair Stromgren noted that there is an issue with the shape of the site stating that it appears that 24 they would need a variance on three sides because the R-4 setbacks would be more restrictive. 25 26 Mr. Harriss assured the Commission that they would be ok from the Lowry side adding that he 27 knows they are five feet closer to the line on the Kenzie side. He stated that if this is a major 28 issue they would be willing to consider making an adjustment. He explained that they felt that 29 due to the heavy commercial nature of Kenzie Terrace that it would be appropriate to bring the 30 building up 25-feet. He stated that it is his belief that they are ok with the property that abuts the 31 residential area adding that they are looking to apply for one or two setback variance requests. 32 33 Chair Stromgren clarified that in an R-4 Zoning District the rear yard requirement is 40 feet and 34 that code defines it as opposite of the main entry. 35 36 Mr. Harriss acknowledged his concern noting that these are all issues that they plan to discuss 37 with Staff. He assured the Commission that they would work closely with Staff to make the 38 necessary adjustments to the proposal. 39 40 Chair Stromgren stated that based on his calculations for a 33-unit building they would need at 41 least 70,000 square feet to compensate for the density. 42 43 Mr. Harriss agreed that the square footage would have to be reviewed further and assured that 44 Commission that this would be reviewed further with staff prior to the next hearing. 45 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 20, 2005 Page 13 1 Commissioner Jensen asked if the Planning Commission has ever reviewed setbacks with respect 2 to structural distance. He expressed concerns stating that they would have to process variance 3 requests for all areas of the underground parking that would be built apart from the main building 4 structure. He stated that they would have to provide the Commission with a clear set of plans 5 that clearly outlines and defines the utility and variance issues. 6 7 Mr. Harriss assured the Commission that it is their plan to meet with the Public Works 8 department to discuss all of these issues. He stated that it is his hope that he would receive some 9 kind of encouragement from the Commission to move forward on this project so that they can 10 begin to schedule their meetings with Staff. 11 12 Vice Chair Hanson asked Mr. Harriss why he believes that this project would be a success. 13 14 Mr. Harriss stated that they believe that this is an appropriate scale for this location noting that it 15 would be a great location for the proposed building. He stated that they plan to do a market study 16 noting that based on their experience in this area and on the sales in St. Anthony this site has 17 great potential for this type of housing. 18 19 Bob Leback, developer, stated that he has spent the last twelve years raising equity with 20 condominium projects and it is his belief that he is seeing the Twin Cities accepting this type of 21 market more and more. He stated that he is seeing a lot of fill-in sites, in various areas, that are 22 providing smaller unit projects for the empty nester market. He stated that he sees this as 23 complimenting the assisted living proposals more so than as a conflict. 24 25 Commissioner Jensen asked for further clarification on the traffic flow for the site. He expressed 26 concerns stating that given the odd configuration of both sites there could be traffic issues to the 27 west. He asked if a shared access point would be appropriate in order to help with the circulation 28 of traffic. He suggested that they do a traffic study to help determine traffic flow and circulation. 29 30 Mr. Harriss stated that they would welcome getting together to discuss and review the traffic 31 flows for the area. He noted that Ms. Moore-Sykes has already identified several traffic schemes 32 and reviewed with the Commission. He indicated that they are very open to considering any 33 number of options with respect to traffic flow noting that he does see a possibility for combining 34 three access points and reviewed with the Commission. 35 36 Commissioner Jenson asked why the front entrance faces Lowry South versus Kenzie Terrace. 37 38 Mr. Harriss explained that it was a question of how it would eventually lay out on the lot and 39 reviewed with the Commission. He stated that they felt a strong building presence on Kenzie 40 Terrace would be the best view versus a view of the parking lot. 41 42 Chair Stromgren stated that part of the problem going forward is in looking at all of the variances 43 they would need. He stated that there are certain tests the City and State can do to see how some 44 of variances could be met and reviewed the process with the Commission. He stated that the 45 tests would have to pass and all conditions would have to be met in order to gain approval of the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 20, 2005 Page 14 1 variance requests. 2 3 Mr. Harriss noted that in order to build they would have to meet the minimum requirements for 4 the number of units adding that they would not be able to build a 33-unit building without going 5 up four stories. He stated that he would review the proposal with Staff noting that one of the 6 things that ends up driving a project like this is the parking requirements, which could take up a 7 lot of buildable space. He assured the Commission that they would work to identify and site the 8 building on the lot so that the setback requests would be acceptable to the City. He stated that 9 they are in the early stages of planning and are working to identify all issues that should be 10 addressed. 11 12 Chair Stromgren stated that it is nice to have a developer who comes in and immediately 13 provides a 2-space per unit parking up front adding that he also appreciates the green-space 14 recommendations in their plan. 15 16 Commissioner Jensen stated that they had previously discussed the text amendment requiring a 17 three-acre minimum adding that A PUD would more than likely happen on the north side of the 18 property. He stated that this proposal is clearly under the three-acre minimum and that this alone 19 would reopen the discussions. 20 21 Chair Stromgren asked if they have a timeline in place. He stated that the Commission expects 22 to see extensive plans and designs at the public hearing. 23 24 Mr. Harriss stated that they anticipate beginning the project in the next four to five weeks. He 25 stated that they would like to try getting this done internally within the next 30-days. He 26 expressed concerns stating that if they have to revisit the design in a substantial way that could 27 delay the process. He stated that their target is to have the preliminary plat ready and available to 28 review at the next Planning Commission. He assured the Commission that they would not come 29 before the Planning Commission without a complete package for them to review. He asked the 30 Planning Commission for positive feedback on the project noting that it would allow him to be 31 able to go back to the owner and request an extension. 32 33 Commissioner Jensen stated that the Commission is not opposed to housing at this location 34 adding that they want clarity from the Public Works department on this site. He stated that the 35 existence of property lines on an `as is' condition gives no indication as to where they would be 36 on a re-plat. He stated that it would be nice for the Commission to be able to know where the 37 lines are because this is where the setbacks would come from. 38 39 Chair Stromgren referenced the County right-of-way and asked for clarification. 40 41 Mr. Harriss assured the Commission that they would not submit this without a survey adding that 42 they would like some sense of encouragement from the City for potential redevelopment of this 43 parcel. 44 45 Chair Stromgren asked if the Concept Review is on the Council agenda. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 20, 2005 Page 15 1 2 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that the City Council would review the Planning Commission minutes 3 noting that the concept review is usually done at the Planning Commission level. She stated that 4 it would be up to the Commission to decide if they want the concept review to be done at the 5 Council level. 6 7 Chair Stromgren stated that he would like to get a feel from the Council as to their thoughts on 8 this proposal noting that the proposal for housing is a good one. He stated that he would like 9 more clarification and answers to their questions. 10 11 Mr. Harriss stated that he would like to take the path of least resistance noting that the proposed 12 general site plan and configuration of the building is the best design for the site. He stated that 13 they might be able to come up with something more accountable to the Commission and 14 reviewed. 15 16 Commissioner Jensen expressed concerns stated that this corner does not have much viability. 17 He stated that they would probably be looking at some rezoning in this area, which means there 18 would probably be a text amendment for the PUD. He stated that it is time to address how they 19 would handle smaller sites. 20 21 Commissioner Jenson agreed noting that this site has been underutilized for over ten years. 22 23 Ms. Moore-Sykes suggested considering another concept review with the Planning Commission. 24 She stated that it appears that the groundbreaking won't happen until next spring, which would 25 give them some time to work through the plan. 26 27 Mr. Harriss confirmed that the groundbreaking would probably not take place until the Spring of 28 2007 and reviewed with the Commission. He stated that there is still information that the current 29 owner has to provide and the owner would have to provide them with an extension to get the 30 project done. 31 32 Commissioner Hoska noted that if they were to go through any of the first ring suburbs they 33 would see a lot of this kind underutilized properties adding that they are now trying to revitalize 34 the first ring suburbs and make them a place people want to live. 35 36 Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated that they are also very close to the college campuses adding that 37 there is also a market for professionals and singles who want to be close enough to downtown yet 38 not in downtown area. 39 40 IX. PUBLIC INPUT 41 42 Glenn Gavik, 2605 Lowry Avenue Northeast, stated that he lives next door to the proposed 43 project the Commission just discussed and expressed concerns that he did not hear from anyone 44 regarding this project. He stated that he is concerned that they are proposing to build a four-story 45 building next to his home and that it would affect his property value. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 20, 2005 Page 16 1 2 Chair Stromgren explained that notices are sent out to affected property owners for public 3 hearings not concept reviews and reviewed the process with Mr. Gavik. 4 5 Mr. Gavik asked what they would do for homeowners that live in the area. He stated that he and 6 his neighbors have lived in St. Anthony for over 29-years and asked the Commission how they 7 would feel if they had something like this going up next to them. He expressed concerns stating 8 that he does not understand why they want to squeeze so much onto such a small parcel of land. 9 He indicated that there has been some discussion about the possibilities of buying out the 10 properties in the area adding that he has not heard anything regarding the results of that 11 discussion. 12 13 Chair Stromgren stated that the Commission would update City Staff about the possibilities and 14 their interest in possibility selling their properties adding that the City would not have anything to 15 do with the decision for a property buyout. 16 17 Mr. Gavik asked why the developers have not tried to work with the residents in purchasing their 18 lots. He indicated that one of the residents, who lives in the middle of the properties, did not 19 want to sell so the developers did not pursue it any further and asked why. He stated that it 20 appears that there is no concern about the other residents adding that he would like to know what 21 the setbacks are for the development. He asked the Commission to make sure that they adhere to 22 all of the requirements. 23 24 X. INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION. 25 26 Captain John A. Ohl—Named as St. Anthony Police Chief 27 28 10.1 Ms. Moore-Sykes announced that John Ohl has accepted the position of the Chief of 29 Police for the City of St. Anthony and reviewed with the Commission. 30 31 XI. ANNOUNCEMENTS 32 33 Commissioner Jenson asked if there have been any more leases granted in the commercial 34 sections of the City. He asked if there would be an open house for Silver Lake Village. 35 36 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that an Open House for Silver Lake Village is scheduled for October 19, 37 2005. 38 39 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that the Chamber of Commerce is working with the management team 40 on the Oktoberfest noting that it is currently scheduled for October 15, 2005 from 3:00 p.m. to 41 9:00 P.M. 42 43 Commissioner Hoska asked for an update on tenants for the Hitching Post. 44 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 20, 2005 Page 17 1 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that she is not certain what is happening with the St. Anthony 2 Marketplace outlot. She stated that she is not sure of the timeline for the groundbreaking and 3 construction noting that it is soon. She stated that Henney's is still moving forward with the 4 purchase agreement noting that a letter has been sent to the Attorneys noting that the Hitching 5 Post has met all of the requirements. She indicated that they should start seeing some movement 6 in next couple weeks adding that the liquor license application would be before the Council at 7 their next meeting. 8 9 Commissioner Jensen asked if it would be appropriate for the Planning Commission to review 10 text amendments that would address requests for smaller sites before anything else come before 11 the Commission for consideration. He stated that they should consider at what point they would 12 make accommodations for design and what would be right for the community. He stated that it 13 would make sense to examine this before another request is presented for consideration. 14 15 Chair Stromgren agreed stating that both are very small parcels. 16 17 Commissioner Jensen stated that hearing from the Public Works department on these issues 18 would be very relevant whether they move forward with applications or not. 19 20 Ms. Moore-Sykes agreed stating that there are several issues and concerns that would have to be 21 addressed before they could move forward. 22 23 Commissioner Jensen asked if Lowry is a split right-of-way with the County and where does it 24 stop. He asked if this would impact the design in any way. 25 26 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that she would try to get that information together for their next review 27 adding that she would also do more research on the PUD's for smaller parcels. 28 29 Commissioner Jensen extended kudos to Public Works Director Hartman and others for the 30 pedestrian signs. He stated that the signs have made a lot of difference with the drivers in the 31 area. 32 33 Commissioner Jenson stated that they have had a lot of discussion with the Apache Medical 34 group regarding setbacks adding that they should make sure that they remain consistent with all 35 groups. 36 37 XII. ADJOURNMENT 38 39 Motion by Commissioner Jensen, second by Commissioner Hoska, to adjourn the meeting at 40 9:07 p.m. 41 42 _Motion carried unanimously. 43 44 Respectfully submitted, 45 Bonnie Sullivan Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 20, 2005 Page 18 1 TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.