HomeMy WebLinkAboutPL PACKET 08152006 Meeting Sheet
IIIIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII IIII IIII
104957
Box: 33
Folder: PL PACKETS 2005-2011
Document: PL PACKET 08152006
CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA
AUGUST 151, 2006
7:00 P.M. REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
I. CALL TO ORDER.
II. ROLL CALL.
III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA.
IV. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 18, 2006
V. COMMUNICATION WITH CITY COUNCIL.
VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS.
VI.1. None
VII. CONCEPT REVIEWS.
VII.1. None
VIII.GENERAL BUSINESS.
VIII.1. Review Modifications to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project
Area No. 3 and Modifications to Tax Increment Financing District No. 3 for
confirmation to the General Plans for the Development and Redevelopment of
the City.
VIII.2. Comp Plan Task Force Update
IX. ANNOUNCEMENTS.
X. ADJOURNMENT.
FAP1anning\PC Agendas\2006\081706 pc agenda.doc
i
1 CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
2
3 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
4
5 July 18, 2006
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 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
13 Chair Stromgren invited the Commission and the audience to join in the Pledge of
14 Allegiance.
15
16 II. ROLL CALL.
17 Commissioners present: Chair Stromgren, Vice Chair Hanson, Commissioners
18 Galyon, Hoska, Jensen, Jenson, and Young.
19
20 Absent: None
21
22 Also present: Assistant City Manager Kim Moore-Sykes.
23
24 III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA.
25
26 Motion by Commissioner Hoska, second by Commissioner Hanson to approve the
27 meeting agenda.
28 Motion carried unanimously.
29
30 IV. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES.
31
32 Motion by Vice Chair Hanson, second by Commissioner Galyon, to approve the
33 Planning Commission meeting minutes of June 20, 2006 with one correction.
34
35 Abstain (Jenson and Jenson) Motion carried.
36
37 V. COMMUNICATION WITH CITY COUNCIL.
38 5.1 Commissioner Hanson will attend the City Council meeting on July 25, 2006.
39
40 VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS.
41 6.1 , Building Fasteners —Variance Request for Parking Expansion
42
43 Chair Stromgren opened the public hearing at 7:04 p.m.
44
45 Assistant City Manager Moore-Sykes presented the report for a parking variance from
46 Building Fasteners, 2825 and 2827 Anthony Lane South. The zoning district is
47 industrial. This action is schedule for the July 25, 2006 Council meeting.
48
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes 2
July 18, 2006
Page 2
1 Assistant City Manager Moore-Sykes reported Staff was contacted by Mr. Loren
2 O'Brien, CEO, Building Fasteners, about proposed renovation plans to their building for
3 additional office space. The renovation plan also calls for parking expansion to relieve a
4 tight parking situation. To achieve more parking, Building Fasteners proposes to
5 encroach approximately ten feet west into the side yard adjacent to Anthony Lane
6 South. Mr. O'Brien suggested they would add four to seven parking stalls in the front of
7 the building (south side) for walk-in clients. Mr. O'Brien is very interested in keeping his
8 business in St. Anthony.
9
10 Assistant City Manager Moore-Sykes mentioned the City asked Staff to explore the
11 feasibility of constructing on-street angle parking along the main portion of Anthony
12 Lane South approaching this area. Staff researched this option and determined this
13 portion of Anthony Lane South is very busy, bringing traffic to the area from 29th
14 Avenue and County Road 94 during the morning rush hour and relieving the area in the
15 afternoon. The proposed on-street parking would create additional problems traffic
16 flow.
17
18 Assistant City Manager Moore-Sykes stated a variance is required because the City's
19 Ordinance restricts parking within ten feet of a front lot line in this zoning district.
20 Variances as granted by the City Council allow modifications to the dimensional
21 requirements of a particular zoning district. Statutorily, City Council has the authority to
22 grant variances when performance standards as required by the Zoning Code cannot
23 be met due to unusual physical site characteristics, called a hardship.
24
25 Assistant City Manager Moore-Sykes explained that Section 1665.06 outlines the
26 requirements that must be addressed to qualify for a variance and the process by which
27 a variance is granted. Subdivision 3 states that no variance will be granted unless
28 evidence presented discloses that strict enforcement would cause undue hardship if:
29 the property cannot be put to a reasonable use without the variance; the circumstances
30 causing the hardship were not created by the owner; the variance, if granted, will not
31 alter the essential characteristics of the locality; economic considerations alone are not
32 the basis of the hardship; the circumstances causing the hardship are unique to the
33 individual lot; and the granting of the variance is in keeping with the spirit and intent of
34 the zoning Code.
35
36 Assistant City Manager Moore-Sykes reported findings of fact indicate the warehouse
37 and related office uses of Building Fasteners, as it currently exists, does meet permitted
38 use criteria of the ordinance but does need to provide an additional eleven parking
39 spaces to comply with the City's Zoning Code requirements for parking in this district.
40
41 Assistant City Manager Moore-Sykes stated property use and parking needs have
42 changed over time. The building originally built in 1981 and previously known as Hub
43 Warehouse, met the required parking spaces for the business at that time. Mr.
44 O'Brien's business has required additional staff to accommodate the needs of his
45 business. As a result, increased parking spaces are required based on the number of
46 employees on the largest shift.
J ,
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes 3
July 18, 2006
Page 3
1
2 Assistant City Manager Moore-Sykes indicated that approving the variance would not
3 alter the essential character of the area due to the requirement of the Zoning Code for
4 high-density parking areas to accommodate the large number of employees and service
5 providers required by businesses existing in this zoning district.
6
7 Assistant City Manager Moore-Sykes stated that while the variance, if approved, would
8 proved for the construction of the minimum number of parking spaces required to
9 satisfy the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code for this zoning district.
10
11 Assistant City Manager Moore-Sykes stated the circumstances causing the hardship
12 are unique to the individual lot. The lot is a corner lot adjacent to a busy County road
13 and requires a larger set back on the west side of the building. The west side is also
14 considered the front yard, also requiring a large set back. The building also occupies
15 more than 50% of the lot, therefore limiting parking space.
16
17 Assistant City Manager Moore-Sykes informed the Commission that granting parking
18 variance would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code.
19
20 Assistant City Manager Moore-Sykes instructed the Planning Commission to send a
21 recommendation to the City Council to approve or deny Mr. O'Brien's request for a
22 variance to the City's Parking Ordinance based on the findings of fact as derived from
23 the information presented by Mr. O'Brien and Staff.
24
25 Chair Stromgren asked Mr. O'Brien for a summary of his proposal.
26
27 Mr. O'Brien presented the sketch plans, pointing out where the small warehouse space
28 would be located on the east side, a second floor office space over the existing office
29 space all the way to the east side and a second story office over the west.
30
31 Mr. O'Brien mentioned the parking problems experienced at shift change. Currently, his
32 neighbors to the east have let them use their parking. This has not been a problem, but
33 he would like to plan for future growth of the business in this building. Originally this
34 building was constructed as a multi-tenant building. Over the years they have made
35 renovations to accommodate their needs. At the last meeting, recommended changes
36 were discussed to the plan for the building. The engineer suggested they go one foot
37 into the west and south property lines. He feels the two-foot recommendation from the
38 Commission is too short to get into and out of the parking lot. The engineer also
39 recommends moving the far northwest corner back into the existing parking lot. Mr.
40 O'Brien stated they have done that. He would also block the exit and entranceway on
41 the northeast corner and turn this into green space.
42
43 Commissioner Jenson asked where the current parking space is located and how many
44 total parking spots there are. Mr. O'Brien pointed out the location of the total 32
45 spaces.
46
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes 4
July 18, 2006
Page 4
1 Commissioner Jenson asked where the proposed new parking would be. Mr. O' Brien
2 indicated it would go along the east side of the current parking lot along the west side of
3 the building. They would also widen the parking lot out to within one foot of the property
4 line on the west side.
5
6 Mr. O'Brien pointed out they would like to make the entrance off Anthony Lane South a
7 one-way so customers would park in front and then exit through the drive on the
8 southeast corner onto Anthony Lane South.
9
10 Commissioner Young asked if the expansion would destroy the trees on the west side
11 and would he replace them. Mr. O'Brien stated the trees would be destroyed and he is
12 willing to replace the trees.
13
14 Chair Stromgren asked if the new trees would be in the right of way. Assistant City
15 Manager Moore-Sykes said they would need to check with Public Works to see where
16 trees could be planted. Mr. O'Brien pointed to the sketch plan to indicate where
17 additional trees could be planted.
18
19 Commissioner Jensen asked if the proposed curb would be the vertical curve rather
20 than the surmountable or curved style. Mr. O'Brian said that up against the building it
21 appears to be some type of pillar curb.
22 -
23 Chair Stromgren said it is a MNDOT standard curb. He asked why the change along the
24 building now indicates wheel stops. Mr. O'Brien said when the plan changed to up to a
25 foot of the property line they lost a foot and so moved it closer to the building.
26
27 Chair Stromgren closed the public hearing at 7:15 p.m.
28
29 Commissioner Jensen stated he was not at the last meeting for the concept review
30 where there was discussion about if the westerly curb line should be closer. He
31 understands that what the consulting engineer is proposing is that most of the City's
32 compliance stall dimension is in pavement so there is approximately a 20 foot paved
33 stall along the west line. He assumes most of the vehicle mix is pickups and therefore
34 longer. The variance goes to where the curb line is so the wheels would be somewhere
35 behind where the front of a vehicle would be. Although we are playing with small
36 numbers, it would probably still be a variance. It might not be from one foot, you might
37 gain two feet from a practical point of view and still have a variance.
38
39 Chair Stromgren stated it would be nice to get off the property line, which they did by
40 pulling off the foot, and eliminated two spaces on the north that was more of a site line
41 issue for turning vehicles onto County Road C and 29tH
42
43 Commissioner Jensen stated the site is somewhat unique in that there are three front
44 entrances. He asked if there was much distinction in the internal analysis to Anthony
45 Lane South on the south side of the building where the drive-through lane is proposed
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes 5
July 18, 2006
Page 5
1 versus Anthony Lane South, which has the larger median. There is no distinction that
2 both are a foot off the line.
3
4 Assistant City Manager Moore-Sykes stated that when she drove the site and talked to
5 the Public Works Director, she found the west side has always been considered the
6 front yard for the property.
7
8 Commissioner Jenson asked Mr. O'Brien if the city desk area was considered the front
9 yard.
10
11 Mr. O'Brien replied he considers the west side to be the front yard. At one time there
12 were two monument signs there. The footings were removed from this area. He does
13 not know how these were put on the City property in the first place.
14
15 Assistant City Manager Moore-Sykes stated, in looking in the file, there is no evidence
16 of previous Conditional Use Permits or variances for this property.
17
18 Mr. O'Brien asked about having the lights that are sitting in this area removed.
19
20 Commissioner Jensen stated there is not a proposal to vacate the utility easement on
21 the west line so if for some reason, utilities meet under this area it could be a problem.
22 Mr. O'Brien indicated there were no utilities located here.
23
24 Chair Stromberg remarked on the discussion at the last meeting about vacating of the
25 northeast drive onto 29th is a positive to the green space and eliminate one turning
26 movement at a busy intersection.
27
28 Mr. O'Brien indicted the plan is to renovate the entire exterior of the building also.
29
30 Motion by Chair Stromgren, second by Commissioner Young, to recommend approval
31 of a parking variance to the City Council at 2825 and 2827 Anthony Lane South. The
32 variance to be nine feet on the west (front yard) and four feet on the south (side yard)
33 on the basis that strict enforcement of the code without the variance would cause
34 undue hardship because the property cannot be put to reasonable use without the
35 variance. Property use and parking needs have changed over time and they are
36 currently and would be within the code requirement in the future. The variance is
37 required for operational reasons to minimize the impact on parking and traffic at shift
38 change. The owner did not create circumstances causing the hardship. The
39 configuration of the building, parking and the corner lot are unique. The variance would
40 not alter the essential characteristics of the locality and would still be consistent with the
41 industrial district and neighboring properties. Economic considerations alone are not the
42 basis for the hardship. The property is currently within compliance with City code and
43 additional parking stalls would not be for primary economic benefits such as customers.
44 Circumstances are unique to this lot in that it is fronted on three sides by a public right
45 of way. The owner is making significant gestures to the City to turn back some existing
46 paved area that improves public safety and provides an environmental benefit. Granting
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes 6
July 18, 2006
Page 6
1 of the variance is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code as the
2 property is currently in compliance. The variance would include the condition that the
3 applicant replace the same quantity of trees as removed and obtain approval from City
4 Staff for type and arrangement.
5
6 Commissioner Jensen added, for the record, that Anthony Lane South is an above
7 average width right of way on the west side so the variance would not impact the
8 usability of the boulevard for Anthony Lane and the distance from the curb to the
9 parking lot would exceed that of a typical right of way to the standard except for the
10 curb.
11
12 Motion carried unanimously.
13
14 Chair Stromgren informed Mr. O'Brien this is a recommendation only to the City Council
15 and that he is to explain his proposal at a City Council meeting.
16
17 VII. CONCEPT REVIEWS.
18 7.1 None
19
20 VIII. INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION.
21 8.1 Comprehensive Plan Task Force Update
22
23 Assistant City Manager Moore-Sykes informed the Comp Plan Task Force would meet
24 in September. Mr. Weber, Planning Consultant has been working on his analysis and
25 traffic studies. He is looking at the photos presented by the members. She will email
26 everyone of the exact date for the meeting.
27
28 8.2 Walkable Communities — Safe Routes Grant Updates
29
30 Assistant City Manager Moore-Sykes updated the Commission on the Walkable
31 Communities Safe Routes to School grant application. She met with the City Engineer
32 and the Community Developments Director to work on the Federal grant administered
33 by MNDOT for safe routes to school. They applied for a grant for a sidewalk along
34 Highland from 29th to 37th. It can loop that side of the City and make the park at 29th
35 accessible to everyone who uses the park. It would connect the trail around the City.
36
37 Assistant City Manager Moore-Sykes stated the most the City can get from the grant is
38 $175,000. They will hear some time in September if the grant is awarded to St.
39 Anthony. This is not a matching grant, so the City does not have to come up with
40 $175,000. They would come up with whatever is needed to put build the sidewalk. She
41 also stated the City an go back year after year to apply for the grant.
42
43 IX. ANNOUNCEMENTS.
44
45 Commissioner Hoska asked if the village pub would be open by the end of the month.
46
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes 7
July 18, 2006
Page 7
1 Assistant City Manager Moore-Sykes said the owner was in last week to ask when
2 Village Fest was and stated the Village Pub would be open by then.
3
4 Commissioner Jenson asked when Pei Wei would open. Assistant City Manager
5 Moore-Sykes said July 27, 2006.
6
7 Vice Chair Hanson inquired as to Brownies opening date. Assistant City Manager
8 Moore-Sykes is not sure. They are working on getting the sign permit and renovation
9 permits.
10
11 X. ADJOURNMENT.
12
13 Motion by Vice Chair Hanson, second by Commissioner Galyon, to adjourn the
14 meeting.
15
16 The meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m.
17
18 Motion carried unanimously.
19
20 Respectfully submitted,
21 Dianna Wise
22 TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
EHLERS
& ASSOCIATES INC
To: St. Anthony Planning Commission
OFrom: Stacie Kvilvang—Ehlers and Associates
W
Date: August 15,2006
Subject: Modification to Redevelopment Project No. 3 and TIF District No. 3
(Cub Foods)
After completing TIF reporting for the City for the first time this year it was noted that the budget
for the above referenced district was not in compliance with the Office of the State Auditor(OSA)
requirements and therefore was producing what is termed "excess increment." Excess increment
is best defined as increment generated in excess of what was budgeted.
TIF District budgets that do not account for all the TIF that is generated is not atypical of districts
created over 10 years ago (this district was created in 1993). This due to the fact that when TIF
districts are created the City makes assumptions as to what will be developed, when it will be
developed and the valuation of the project after completion. As time goes on, the assumptions can
change dramatically (Le a larger development with a higher value can be built or inflation may be
greater than anticipated), which can result in more increment being generated than was budgeted.
We are recommending that the HRA and CC modify the TIF budget for the District to reflect
actual project activity/development to date and expected revenues (this TIF district is now fully
developed). Since the City and HRA are modifying the TIF budgets, the modification is required
to go through the entire public hearing process as if the City and HRA were creating a new TIF
district. As part of this process, the Planning Commission needs to find that the development plan
for this district is in conformance with the City's general development/redevelopment plans of the
City.
Please contact me at 651-697-8506 with any questions.
cc: Jerry Gilligan—Dorsey& Whitney
File
LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE
3060 Centre Pointe Drive Phone: 651-697-8506 Fax: 651-697-8555
Roseville,MN 551 13-1 105 skvilvang®ehlers-inc.com
7�7-
10 AN
■: >tIE Z11.
10
Er wn 11■IC AA[ 6 s
c
219
—� 1� �r•■I■ 119�>��� ii � -
_ l
�" 11. •••11�e :� n- 7►�•AAArIr1AAA••ARA��
. _E�■ .r rrr��■■�■■t�■��■ a sem,
>v'.■p MA■t�. fill III■I Ra NY■[I�■■■AAA■rgll m.■■.' .�.
�: -- 'irr w �� �� r■r rirr rrr.rr■r■r■ r■r mrrrrr■rr
;per rte: ����� ii 1^ .i rA�A■�■■���,i i���%i'
i■:a aim
� .; 161 sr■ri.■r■rrr.
VIE MIN t 11111 ■ /o F
�% �r■ i�� � '�� ii ""';r "�+.� Duran[riir
wor Now
BOW
�E 1 iii -
wlrorrNO
':grrr■rr■r�
��f' ■AApnn�t�� tyNlco�2t S4r"� � . r11.r/rAI��A
_ u 111MV ZZ rnrunup �rnlrrrnaull; �: ;� Win!
_�,r Al.�.�A/AAIn111E ..�a•AAl1U,1�E •■� � �-:1
� ;:�a rrrnurrl err urnllrRut �•�� ����
���. �: Cllllllllllllrl� �ir■Irlrr■Irrr■■a arrrrrM+,� .,.;«
>t�i�si •'1.r11■■OIq�■p �1!/lgr[.r/r,1� +���.• .3 ..
��is iw .'�.UIIIIIrPIr■1. `'•IrO1rp11�111L� ��• ��''''
�I e • • �.;
Ci wAlI1r11111i111Q X1111 11111 .rlr/1�.���•
' ' '=1113 n derrs .rrrrr.■• ••• ■.��•s a
- g��f�a ���1�1•i NO IIIItR a
' � r 1 r Irrrriurrll 1n �� wA +�,� �• �w �;
c;�� /�II�I1�uu111q.R�l���n��w� •�•�1w� 7,L>r}; o�' tea,
= arra[rrlrnrrllrrrrm;r���'Q��af,��►r: � ��.
11r�m rrlr����rr�n��,u,A■ rn■r■r■.
�� JIIIIINIiIII Irl It�� �i`''�grq�lir�"'j 3: �
r O'
cIIuIIIlIUlIrIlIrmIIiIlrIlIil1A11i1�ll1IlI/fIf�Ilri��rjr�'�•I`/�•��f r, �_
mmmmmm
1�
a ,���r!��•�
ANNE
�� � N
R� ritil e�5i
�.�..1'1.IIf1l1�•U 114.�,.I�� � rs f �'-has.�, v.�
illh•iljltttltttttt Itllt
• tg�.
l6,'tr£sy ,z
fiE p el'
Y
'�t3[3 W' ■
FINDINGS OF FACT
The Planning Commission recommends approval of the Modification to
Redevelopment Project No. 3 and TIF District No. 3 (Cub Foods) based on the
following Findings of Fact:
Findings of Fact
1. In 2005, the State legislature changed Tax Increment Financing laws that
require municipalities to spend or return any excess increment within nine (9)
months after the end of the year (September 1 of the following year).
2. TIF District No. 3 (Cub Foods) was created in 1993 and it is determined not to
be atypical that districts created over 10 years ago that assumptions made
then can change significantly over time.
3. After completing the TIF reporting for the City in response to the legislation
passed in 2005 and due by September 1, 2006, it was noted that the budget for
the above-referenced district was not in compliance and was therefore
producing"excess increment".
4. In February, the Planning Commission reviewed the Modifications to
Redevelopment Project Area No. 3, the Chandler Place Tax Increment
Financing District and Tax Increment Financing District No. 3-5 Overview
and recommended that the City Council adopt the modifications as
presented.
5. At the August 15, 2006, the Planning Commission continued the process for
adopting the modifications to Redevelopment Project No. 3 and TIF District
No. 3 (Cub Foods) by reviewing the modifications to determine that they
conform to the general plans for the development and redevelopment of the
City as described in the Comprehensive Plan for the City.
6. The Planning Commission does find that the Modifications conform to the
general plans for the development and redevelopment of the City as
described in the current City Comprehensive Plan.
Dated: August 15, 2006
Chair
ATTEST:
City Clerk
FAPlanning\Findings of Fact\Findings of Fact081506 Mod of redevel prj 3 and TIF 3.doc
STAFF REPORT
To: Planning Commission Report No.: VIII.1.
From: Kim Moore-Sykes,Assistant City Manager
Date: February 21,2006
Subject: Modifications of Redevelopment Project Area No. 3, the Chandler Place Tax Increment
Financing District and Tax Increment Financing District No. 3-5 Overview.
Requested Action: Review the proposed modifications of Redevelopment Project Area No. 3, the Chandler
Place Tax Increment Financing District and Tax Increment Financing District No. 3-5 Overview.
Background: The City has several areas of redevelopment that were originally organized as Tax Increment
Financing (TIF) Districts in the mid 1980s. Over time and as allowed by state legislation, these TIF Districts
have been modified in order to be utilized in the financing of various redevelopment projects throughout the
City. On November 12, 1996 the City's Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) approved amendments
to the Redevelopment Plans,Financing Plans and Redevelop Projects designated as the Master Modification,
which authorized tax increment revenue derived from any of the Districts to be utilized to remove,prevent and
reduce blight, blighting factors and the causes of blight in any areas subject to the Redevelopment Plans.
This 2006 Amendment to the Master Modification for Project Area No. 3, the Chandler Place Tax Increment
Financing District and Tax Increment Financing District No. 3-5 proposes to do two things: 1.) The HRA
identified certain property in the City that is not presently included in any of the areas subject to the
Redevelopment Plans but believed by the HRA to either presently contain blight or blighting factors or because
of age, obsolescence, market conditions and other factors is susceptible to blighting conditions;and 2.) To
provide budgetary authority to utilize increased tax increment, to modify the budget to reflect actual project
activity and to bring it into compliance with the State Auditor budget requirements.
Attachments:
• An Overview Summary of the Modifications of Redevelopment Project Area No. 3, the Chandler
Place Tax Increment Financing District and Tax Increment Financing District No. 3-5.
• Abbreviated Packet as prepared by Ehlers &Associates and LHB Architects for Ramsey County.
• Memo from the City Attorney
022106 TIF Modification to Dist 3.doc