Loading...
06-09-03 PC Agenda AGENDA GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting Golden Valley City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Road Council Chambers Monday, June 9, 2003 7pm I. Approval of Minutes - May 12, 2003 Planning Commission Meeting II. Informal Public Hearing - Conditional Use Permit (CU-102) Applicant: Robert H. Sarvey (Elite Auto Sales Inc.) Address: 9010 Olson Memorial Highway, Golden Valley, MN Purpose: The applicant would like to use the building for indoor and outdoor auto sales in the Commercial zoning district. -- Short Recess -- III. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings IV. Other Business A. Letter from Gary Gandrud, Faegre & Benson regarding a proposed Text Amendment in the Industrial zoning district. B. Review of changes to Section 11.21 of the City Code (Single-Family) C. Review of fence regulations Section 4.07 of the City Code (Fences and Screening) D. Review of Comprehensive Plan for higher density housing for Golden Valley. V. Adjournment . . . Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission May 12, 2003 A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held at the Golden Valley City Hall Council Chamber, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota, on Monday, May 12, 2003. Chair Pentel called the meeting to order at 7 pm. Those present were Chair Pentel and Commissioners Eck, Groger, Rasmussen and Shaffer. Also present were Director of Planning a Mark Grimes and Administrative Assistant, Lisa Wittman. Com . absent. was I. Approval of Minutes - March 24, 2003 Planning Co MOVED by Groger, seconded by Keysser and mor the minutes from March 24, 2003 as submitted. II. Informal Public Hearing - Conditi Applicant: ABC Investment L Address: Purpose: like to use the building for an auto sales/auto ommercial zoning district. Grimes explained t sales at the former several years. changed due t t is requesting a Conditional Use Permit for auto Training Facility which has been sitting vacant for e map and discussed how the property and area has of TH 100 and TH 55. erty is designated Commercial on the Comprehensive Plan ing ap and that the City Code states that outdoor auto sales and Conditional Use Permit in the Commercial zoning district. d the applicants proposed plans for the property and stated that they are not p g to do any changes to the footprint of the building but that are proposing to enhance the appearance of the exterior of the building by creating a new entrance for the office and adding new windows. He added that they are also proposing to add some additional lighting to the site. Grimes stated that ABC Investment LLC does business as Poquet Auto in St. Louis Park. The proposed site in Golden Valley would replace their St. Louis Park location. Poquet would like to do some minor auto repair in Golden Valley, which they do not . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission May 12, 2003 Page 2 currently do at their present location. However, there would be no major mechanical work done. Grimes discussed the parking requirements and said that currently there are 200 spaces on the site. The site plan submitted by Poquet indicated 132 spaces that would be used for display and the remainder for employee and customer parking. He stated that it should be noted that he suggested to the applicant that they make the customer and employee parking spaces 20 feet deep as required by Code instead e 18 feet deep spaces they have indicated on their plans. s ss quate impact on Grimes stated that a concern raised by concerned neighbors he been auto transport access. He explained that the auto transp the site from the south about 2 to 3 times per week and that space on the site to allow for delivery by these large trucks the area. . Grimes discussed the landscape plan submitted was an error in his report. The middle area of th landscaped as mentioned but will remain paved of parking. This area is proposed to be u They are planning significant landscap' about five feet of addition green spa discussed the lighting plan and s stated that the lighting plan will lights would be required to d stated that there is no going to be y and will be used for proof by the transport trucks. ought iron fencing and perimeter of the site. He are Iy three additional fixtures. He ap ved by the Building Official and that the n to se urity lighting levels after 8 pm. I 9 to 10 people and that based on current y 1,200 cars per year which would generate about 70 significantly less than most any other type of retail ded that car dealerships typically don't cause a lot of urs. He explained that the noise level would not be that he can't imagine the auto transports would be a p ofts only two to three times per week. He stated that he Park Police Department and that there have been very few plicant's current operation. the list of ten conditions from his memo and added to the list that all test driv take place south of the site toward TH 55 and that there be no flags, balloons, banners, etc. allowed on the site. He clarified that minor repair to him means oil changes, alignments, tire replacements, minor brake work and tune ups. . Pentel asked what size of sign the Sign Code would allow. Grimes stated that it is based on a percentage of the size of the frontage of the building. Grimes said they are not going to putupa pylon sign and that would have to meet all of the sign code requirements. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission May 12, 2003 Page 3 . Eck asked Grimes to show again the way the auto transport trucks would drop off the cars. Grimes referred to the site plan and showed how the trucks would enter the site, drop the cars off and then exit the site. Eck asked if all the loading would be on their site and not on the street at all. Grimes said he didn't think the street would be wide enough. He said that a condition could be put in the permit that all unloading must be done on the site. Pentel asked how deep the green space should be along Lilac Drive if th meet the setback requirements. Grimes said it should be 35 feet. Pen at now. Grimes said it is probably at about 5 feet but that they piano back to create more green space. Groger asked if flags surroundi seem out of character for thi has no intention of puttin 'Iding did hat it is . ence Groger referred to the display area and asked if the 16-foot spaces would be adequate. Grimes stated that the City allo Groger asked about the pavement going up to the buil . g an problems with that. Grimes stated that is why he want Ing play only. re are any es 20 feet deep. . Groger asked where the service bays would be. bays would be on the east side. Groger question buildings being to the east if the service suggested as a condition of approval t is service being done. d th the three service ion with the apartment rimes said that he has e kept closed when there e allowed and stated that it would hat the applicant has told him that he Pentel asked if the green space. Grim variance. ing for a variance from setback requirements for the ecause it is an existing condition they won't require a Keysser s City is . that the I profit margin is in repair, not in sales and asked how the only minor auto repair is going to take place. Grimes stated that their intention is only to do minor repairs. "t%l:' Sha r aske s to review the traffic issue. He asked what the daily trip count woul f r proposed use versus an office use. Grimes stated that a high use would b ips per day. This number is based on what the applicant does in St. Louis Park now. If the space were used for office it would be 300 to 400 trips per day, with high peak hour traffic. He stated that this property is zoned Commercial and that this particular use generates far less traffic than what potentially could go there. Shaffer referred to the lighting plan and stated that he thought it would improve the site . to have more, lower level decorative poles than the three, 30-foot high poles they are Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission May 12, 2003 Page 4 . proposing. Grimes stated that is why he wants the Building Official to review the lighting plan. Colin Sievers, Owner, Paquet Auto and ABC Investment LLC, 6009 Wayzata Boulevard, St. Louis Park, MN 55416, Applicant, stated that he currently has 135 vehicles in his inventory and that sometimes it is higher than that, sometimes it is lower. He gave a packet of information regarding his company to each Planning Commissioner and reviewed it with them. He explained that they specialize in cars that ne to three years old with an average cost of $20,000 and that 80% of their busin referrals or repeat business. He said that they aren't trying to genera and that the cars wouldn't be visible from TH 100 or TH 55 beca th displayed on the north side of the building. He stated that the n't on site for 17 years and that they would like to have them t maintenance work for their customers and that they won't be transmissions or engines. He stated that they have be a me Business Bureau for 16 years and have not had one the Northland Independent Auto Dealers Associ donor for the Cars for Courage charity. He state addition to the community and that they run a ni . Groger asked what the maximum inve cars. Groger stated that the parking f adequate and asked the applica Sievers stated that when he firs space out, but then realized rs stated approximately 150 seems to be more than wa 0 increase the green space. JQ he anticipated renting some of the eed all'w6f the space. n Id become green space. Sievers stated he nted to keep the proof of parking areas. Groger asked i they normally re delivered by auto transport. Sievers stated that a time by auto transport. t if he is leasing or buying the building. Sievers said he is plicant where the trash was going to be stored. Rod Miller, Estate Services, 14685 Langdon Place, Eden Prairie, MN 55347, nting the applicant, stated that they haven't worked that out yet. . Rasmussen asked Miller to discuss the height of the lighting. Miller stated that the intent was to minimize the number of light poles and to make it be more like an office level of lighting. He stated that they were trying to minimize the amount of light spilling off of the site and that it is a trade off to either increase the number of poles and decrease the height of them or to decrease the number of poles and increase the height. He explained that they have proposed to pull the fence in to allow for more green space Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission May 12, 2003 Page 5 . and plantings and that the fence is a six-foot with gates and a box with a key for the fire department. Pentel referred to the proposed future fence ordinance and stated that the height requirement in the Commercial zoning district is four feet in the front yard. Grimes stated that that is a proposed ordinance. Miller stated that the fence height is open for discussion. He showed the some elevations and stated that it is their intent to clean the site up to understated, classy, office look. Pentel opened the public . I stated that eep and some on me on the south that Rasmussen asked Miller to comment on the signage. Miller st side of the building on the awnings on the east end there w Poquet auto and a canopy over the entrance on the east en Pentel asked if it was their intent to keep the trees on t there are some on the north end of the property t the northwest that could be thinned out. He add are nice and that they would like to also kee . Pentel stated that there are sidewalks She asked how the City is going to sh that sidewalks would have to go i intention is for sidewalks from t d that end by this property. s to Meadowbrook. Grimes stated b an that he would find out what the irector. Arlene Weinzierl, 60 Commission to min apartments to ea see the car lot. that they a orth # 10, stated that she wouldn't want the Planning ct this proposal would have on the residents in the at the people who live up higher would still be able to a e proposal doesn't sound as bad as she thought but t more traffic and that another concern is trash and lighting. one, 7400 Metro Boulevard, Edina, MN, Project Manager for 'Iding, stated that it is important that the landscaping around the site . He suggested that more landscaping be done, possibly berming he sea of asphalt on this site. He said he likes the fence idea and agrees lighting plan as long as it is down cast lighting. He suggested not allowing cars to be displayed on any type of raised platforms hoped that the car transport trucks would be sensitive to the office dwellers as well as the apartment dwellers. He asked if the applicant would have to provide any storm water drainage on the site and said that he thinks if they keep their site nice the proposal would be all right with him. . . . . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission May 12, 2003 Page 6 Pentel asked if this site drains to the new ponds in that area. Grimes stated that he believed that that whole quadrant does. Sandy Robin, 921 Toledo Ave. N., stated that since the road opened up she has driven Lilac Road every day and she is very concerned about traffic and transport traffic and that she feels that this type of business is not appropriate even though it is zoned Commercial because it is mostly residential. John Miller, 1025 Unity Ave. N., stated that most of his concerns are tr nobody has control of how traffic comes and goes through the area. about the traffic going north. He stated that this property was zo the frontage road was opened up and questioned if it should s . 50 of the cars would go north through the residential area. the frontage road is not too swift in the way it curves in and 0 ornamental fence would be giving drivers less visibilit~ Judy Davis, 1120 Toledo Ave. N., stated that sh ' the park. She said that her concern is the car tr seeing those come in that area especially with t hildren she takes to e has a hard time Steve Robin, 25 Ottawa Ave. N., state oposed use is almost completely inappropriate for the terr . od is quiet, serene and a low traffic affair. He discussed the his anc nto the Thotland area and how circumstances have changed. t ere are more than two cars on Holiday Lane it is a problem. He dis ture 0 used car lots and said that Poquet has an outstanding reputatio . are a used car lot. He said that this use will draw people into the nei f 0 ther areas and if they miss the cut off and don't understand an get luth they are going to come through their neighborhood. He s ks that despite the happy face that is being put on this proposal i vita ing to be on Unity, Thotland, and Angelo testing cars and inevitably g teliver cars are going to be parked on that road especially' he said that there are a lot of issues being glossed over. He explai Valley High School had football games his family could here pia an cements and that he is sure they will be able to hear the m hanic n cars. He said that he thinks the trips in and out are being mi . ed s and that there are always going to be people cruising the lot who are nor neighborhood. He stated that the hours of an auto dealership are not going to same as that of the neighborhood and that the happy face that was put on the traffic was fine but not the point when the people in the neighborhood is what counts. He said that he doesn't think 70 to 80 trips per day is realistic and clearly there are going to be more people looking than buying. He stated that this usage isn't serving the neighborhood and if a different retail or commercial business went in that location the people from the neighborhood would use those businesses as opposed to people coming in from outside of the neighborhood. He stated that he thinks this proposal would be more appropriate along 1-394 where the test drives are on 1-394. The people . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission May 12, 2003 Page 7 that live in this neighborhood live there because it is an end destination. He said he urges the Planning Commission to reject this application. Lee Haug, 1221 Unity Ave. N., suggested that the Planning Commissioners drive through the area. He said that parents could push their young kids down the middle of the street in their strollers. He said he feels it is an inappropriate use. He said that the City could advise that the traffic go south when they leave the parking lot, but that doesn't mean they have to. He asked what could be more perfect than a ce use in their neighborhood. He said they are the victims of the widening of Hi .and they now have the narrow opening of Lilac Drive into their neighborh e sa 'f the City approved the idea of a used auto dealer they'd be ruining it f 'dent at live there. - John Miller, 1030 Lilac Dr. N., stated that he has spent thous his home and that the traffic in front of his house has ady could see a lot of kids playing people walking in front 0 is a really sharp curve in front of the apartment b living in the area driving would be dangerous es concerned. I: Planning Commission to id that the number of kids in the ed car lot could be catastrophic. . Steve Yingst, 1020 Unity Ave. N., stat consider that where there are cars t neighborhood has never been gr Julia Carlstrom, 5200 Thotl this as a consideration. S to get lost in their area. cars is the time her ids ri transport trucks an are too narrow.. n t to have this in forced to m and th . ted tha she thinks it is so unfair to even have ing to increase their traffic and people are going t ime that people would be coming to look at bikes and that there are going to be problems with the already problems with the traffic because the streets be wider. She said she just doesn't think this is fair they have been so tucked away and they are being rea. She stated that the site should be leveled and rezoned proposal but not in their area. oledo Ave. N., stated that Holiday Lane should be no on-street s f what happens with this project and that trash pick-up should be al business hours rather than at 5:30 am. Seeing and hearing no one, Pentel closed the public hearing. Pentel asked if Holiday Lane is already no parking. Grimes stated that the idea is to make streets narrower so that people don't drive so fast. Keysser said the question was if the street was no parking. Grimes stated that he has not had any complaints about . cars parking on Holiday Lane. . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission May 12, 2003 Page 8 Rasmussen stated that she is concerned about the height of the fencing causing visibility issues around the curves. Grimes stated that the plans were reviewed by the City Engineer and that he didn't have any issues with visibility. Keysser stated that the key question seems to be the traffic going too fast and questioned installing speed bumps. Grimes stated that speed bumps would not be installed and explained that the frontage road was put in to bring traffic north of the railroad tracks. wa e General Motors and that sometimes there go through. Grimes stated that all the City can do is put in the permit that test d . south. Shaffer asked if the City can require them to put up signs. m can be added at a condition of approval. Groger asked if a rig n 0 put up at the east entrance to direct traffic to the south. Gri Grimes stated that in regard to trash pick up there is a picked up before 7:00 am. Keysser asked if there were test drives done wh training center. Grimes stated there weren't test were up to 200 people there, but that the . Rasmussen stated that the character construction. She stated that she and that she doesn't see it bein residents say. She added th the City should be sensiti ".QJ,md to change due to the road \Iei' re ~folng to come and go from TH 55 pplicants say, but not as bad as the h degree of stress right now and that n to this proposal was no way in this area. He said that st uses for this location because it was already made t the issue of traffic going to the north is a concern to p that. He said that he thinks it is unfair to penalize the road going to the north. He understands the neighbors proponent seems to be a responsible member of the said he would be in favor of voting for the proposal with many e agreed with Groger. The access now comes into the neighborhood. It is a fact y use that comes into that building is going to come into the neighborhood. He said that it certainly seems to be a reasonable use. . Keysser stated that he liked the not left turn sign idea and stated that he also agreed that this proposal seems to be the least destructive if traffic going north into the neighborhood could somehow be curtailed. Pentel said she can't support the proposal. She said she thinks Golden Valley has its lion's share of places to buy a used car and although the City can't control where . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission May 12, 2003 Page 9 businesses locate, they are just getting that much closer to residential areas and that is a concern. However, auto dealerships are allowed by conditional use. She said that she is glad that the applicant is buying the facility and not leasing it and that she would like to see a four-foot high fence around the perimeter. Grimes said that he would like the City Engineer to look at the fence height and visibility issue again. She said it is unfortunate not to be able to get green space and that if she were just to look at the building in isolation she could support it. No flags, balloons or other attention grabbing devices shall b 10:00 pm on The Commissioners discussed adding the following conditions of appr proposal. These are in addition to the conditions listed in Grimes re All test drives shall take place south of TH 55. Any trash containers must be held inside of the building. Any trash container pick~up can not happen bef weekdays. . There shall be no outside storage othe There shall be no display of cars All deliveries of automobiles hours. The southeast only" t shall have a sign posted which reads "right turn n't affect the number of parking stalls shall be added to the rimes report - Light poles are to be twenty feet in height or less i1ding Official shall approve the final lighting plan. Rasmussen asked about speed bumps on Thotland Road. Grimes stated there is no history in Golden Valley of having speed bumps. . Pentel asked if there are any places in Golden Valley where there are signs that say no test driving in neighborhood. Grimes stated that he didn't think so, but that they could ask for one. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission May 12, 2003 Page 10 . Pentel asked if the gates would be open on Sundays. Sievers stated no. Shaffer stated that was also alarmed at another used car lot being proposed in Golden Valley. He said at first there is going to be some new traffic concerns. He stated that he thinks most people will go south on TH 55 for test drives and that with signage it won't be a problem. He said he thinks the site could be improved and that he understands the neighbors concerns. He stated that if it were an office there would be a lot more traffic. B. e t 800 Lilac zoning Rasmussen asked if the City could ask the applicant to encourage th . trucks to also drive south of the site. Sievers said that the transport tr residential areas and that they would come into the area from T MOVED by Keysser, seconded by Groger and motion carri Conditional Use Permit request for ABC Investment LLC to u Drive North for an auto sales/auto repair facility locate .n the district. Pentel voted against the proposal. III. Reports on Meetings of the Hou Council, Board of Zoning Ap pment Authority, City ings . Pentel reported on the April 15, 2 by Kart America for an indoor g approved. I e ting and stated that the request 0-750 Florida Avenue South was IV. Other Business A. Preliminary revi to Section 11.21 of the City Code (Single-Family) In ommission to review the preliminary changes to Code and asked them to give feedback at the next eeting. regulations Section 4.07 of the City Code (Fences and Screening) d that the fence regulations aren't officially part of the Zoning Code, but o show them to the Planning Commission and get their feedback. C. Demographic data submitted by Arnie Zachman . Grimes referred to the demographic data submitted by Arnie Zachman and reminded the Planning Commission that Mr. Zachman told them he would be submitting this information when the Housing Plan was discussed at the March 10, 2003 Planning Commission meeting. . . . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission May 12, 2003 Page 11 v. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 9:24 pm. . . . . Planning 763-593-8095/ 763-593-8109 (fax) Date: June 5, 2003 To: Planning Commission From: Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development Subject: Informal Public Hearing on Conditional Use Permit (CUP-1 02) to Allow Both Indoor and Outdoor Auto Sales at 9010 Olson Memorial Highway- Robert H. Sarvey (Elite Auto Sales Inc.), Applicant Robert Sarvey has requested a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) in order to allow for the indoor and outdoor sales of cars at 9010 Olson Memorial Highway (OMH). The property is owned by National Camera (Jonathan Liss). The building is now empty. It was most recently used by National Camera for sales and rental of audiovisual equipment. The Planning Commission may recall that in April 2002, Morrie's Mazda appeared before the Planning Commission at an informal public hearing to utilize the building for used car sales. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of a CUP for Morrie's Mazda. The application was withdrawn before it got to the City Council. I am attaching copies of the Planning Commission minutes when the Morrie's proposal was discussed. Elite Auto Sales will lease the property from Mr. Liss. It will be used in the samoe manner as proposed by Morrie's. In fact, they are using the same site plan and plan for the interior u'se of the building. The description of how the business will operate is almost identical to the one submitted by Morrie's. The only differences are that Elite will have one less employee, expects 180 customers a month rather than 150 and will close at 4 pm on Friday and Saturday instead of 5 pm. As indicated by Elite, they have not owned a retail car business. However, Mr.Sarvey has been the general manager of several dealerships and he has 18 years of experience in the field. He will manage this operation. The cars that will be sold will be late model (2000 and newer) and be "high end" similar to those sold at Auto Point down the street (west). This property is designated on the Comprehensive Plan Map for Commercial uses and is zoned Commercial. The sale of cars is consistent with both the Plan Map and Zoning Map designations. The property is about 43,000 sq. ft. in area or just under an acre. It is triangular in shape and has frontage on both OMH (TH 55) and Golden Valley Rd. Access to the site is only from Golden Valley Rd. The properties to the north, east and west are also zoned and guided Commercial. These uses include several restaurants, auto service, and offices. There . are no residential uses adjacent to the site. There are single-family homes across TH 55 and apartments to the north and west. The single-family homes are over 250 ft. from the site. The property has been used over the past ten years or so for retail sales including the sale and rental of photographic equipment by National Camera and formal wear sales and rental. From late 1988 to the early 1990's, Avis Rent-a-Car used the property for outdoor sales and lease of cars in a manner very similar to the use proposed by Elite. Description of Proposed Use As stated above, Elite would like to utilize the site in a manner very similar to the way Avis used the site in the early 1990's and in the same way as proposed by Morrie's last year. The attached plan indicates that there are no plans to change the parking lot from its existing state. The information submitted by Elite indicates that there are 57 outdoor spaces. Ten (10) of the spaces are designated for customer parking and 6 of the spaces are designated for employee parking. The remaining 41 spaces are for the outdoor display of vehicles. They also plan to display 3 vehicles on a showroom floor inside the building. The building will also be used for offices and storage. Parking of any car must be in a designated parking space and not in any aisle. The use of the interior of the building for a car showroom must be approved by the Inspections Department. . There will be 5 employees on site. They believe that they will have 180 customers a month visit the site. The hours of operation will be Monday-Thursday 9 am to 7 pm, and Friday and Saturday 9 am to 4 pm. There would be no Sunday sales of cars although the office could be used for paperwork. Elite plans to sandblast the exterior of the building to give it a refreshed look. They have not discussed new or additional landscaping but this could be discussed. There are currently 10 large trees on the site. The lighting of the site was an issue when Avis operated at the site. After several attempts, the lighting issue was resolved in order to minimize its effect on the property owners on the south side of TH 55. Staff would include in the CUP that any lighting plan has to be approved by City staff and the City reserves the right to have a lighting consultant review any lighting plans at Elite cost. The staff would also recommend that any lighting be reduced to security lighting only during non-business hours. Any signage proposed for the site must meet the City's sign ordinance. Elite has indicated the location for a pylon sign along the highway. At this time, the staff cannot indicate if this sign would be approved. The staff will also recommend that there be no signs located on cars (other than the sticker in the window required by law) and that there be no display of signs on the inside or outside of windows in the building. This includes the painting of signs on windows of cars or the building. Also, the display of balloons or other inflatable devices would be prohibited at this location, including those attached to cars. Two flagpoles would be permitted. . The staff will also recommend that no outside paging system be used. Most car dealers no longer use outside paging of employees. . Analysis of Ten Factors The Planning Commission must make findings on ten factors when reviewing a CUP application. They are as follows with staff comment: 1. Demonstrated Need of the Use: Elite has demonstrated a desire to sell cars at this location due its good visibility along TH 55. The City's policy has been to allow the market to determine if there is demonstrated need for a certain service or product. This is the third used car dealer in Golden Valley that would sell used cars that is not aligned with a new car dealership. 2. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan: The Plan Map indicates that this area is designated for commercial uses. A car dealer is consistent with this designation. The property is also zoned Commercial. 3. Effect on Property Values in the Area: The staff does not believe that property values would fall due this retail car sales operation. Avis operated at this location for several years and properties maintained or increased in value. Mr. Sarvey, part owner and manager of the proposed Elite operation told me has much experience and will run an operation very similar to Poquet Auto and AutoPoint. . 4. Effect of Use on Traffic in the Area: Elite anticipates about 180 customers per month. This would mean about 300 trips in and out of the site per month by customers. With 6 employees and some deliveries, staff calculates the average daily traffic in and out of the site to be about 50 trips per day. This is a very low number of trips that can more than adequately be handled by the existing street system. Test drives of vehicles in this area should not be of a concern to nearby residential areas. 5. Effect of Increases in Density or Population on the Area: The use will not increase the population of the area. There will be 5 employees that is les than previous users of the site. 6. Increase in Noise Created by Use: The car dealership should not increase the noise level of the area. There is already significant auto noise due to TH 55. No car repair will be done or allowed on the site other than car washing. 7. Any Dust, Odor or Vibration caused by Use: No such problems are expected to be caused by this small car sales operation. 8. Any Increase in Animal Pests Caused by the Use: Car sales will not cause any animal pest problems. . 9. Visual Appearance of the Use: Elite plans to upgrade the outside appearanc~ of the building. . . . 10. Other Effects of the Use: The staff cannot find any other areas of concern. Recommended Action The staff recommends approval of a conditional use permit to allow Elite to operate a car sales lot and indoor showroom at 9010 Olson Memorial Higt:lway. Avis previously used this site for a similar use without any significant impacts on the area. Elite is proposing to display fewer cars on the site and to work with the City to provide a clean and neat site. The staff is recommending the following conditions: 1. The site and building layouts submitted with the CUP application becomes a part of this approval. 2. There shall be no more than 57 total cars on the site. All cars must be parked in designated parking spaces. At least 6 spaces shall be designated for employees and 10 spaces for customers. 3. The hours of operation shall be limited to 9 am to 8 pm Monday through Thursday, and 9 am to 6 pm Friday and Saturday. There shall be no car sales on Sunday although the offices can be used. 4. City staff must approve any outdoor lighting plan. The City reserves the right to require that a lighting consultant chosen by the City review any plan. The cost of the review would be born by Elite. After business hours, the lighting must be turned down to provide only security-type lighting. 5. No repair or maintenance work will be done on site other than car washing. 6. Any signage on the site shall meet the requirements of the City's sign ordinance. 7. There shall be no signage painted on any vehicle or window of any vehicle. There shall be no signage painted or placed on the inside or outside of any window of the building. 8. The display of balloons or other inflatable devices is prohibited. Any type of searchlights or laser lights is also prohibited. 9. The building may be used for the display of up to three vehicles along with offices. The basement may be used for storage. The Director of Inspections must first approve the display of vehicles in the building. 10. No outside speakers are to be used at this site. 11. Two flagpoles for the display of the U.S. and other government flags may be added to the site. . . . 12. Any outside trash containers must be screened with materials similar to that of the building. 13. All other applicable local, state, and federal requirements shall be met. 14. Failure to comply with one or more of the above conditions shall be grounds for revocation of the conditional use permit. Attachments: Location Map Applicant's Narrative Letter from M&N Structures, Inc. dated April 29, 2002 Interior Plans Site Plan Planning Commission Minutes dated April 22, 2002 Planning Commission Minutes dated May 13, 2002 . GOLDEN VALLEY RD II~ I r-___~?TH l- I -r-- I I I i ~ .2l GOt. l>~ ~~-' ,",\G,",'II~"( 55 ,",\G,",'II ~ "( 55 ,",\G,",'II ~ "( 55 ------------ - --..! i i -i I i I I I ./ //c" il i I I . , . . :do\c1eV\ VJ4{ fe.1 tn C(f;1ite ~ ~ah~ Jne. MAYO 9 2003 9010 Olson Memorial Higlnvay Golden Valley, .Mn. 55427 Detail Description of site usage May 9, 2003 The property listed above will be updated by sandblasting the exterior brick to give the building a new, refreshed look It will be used as: * Outside auto sales * Auto sales * Auto showroom * Outside storage documents andparts ( in basement) * Signage and vehicle display . Total number of employees: * There will be 5 employees-- including, but not limited to 1- Manager, 3 Salespeople and 1 Lot Manager Potential customers: * Approximately 180 Per month Hours of operation: * Monday-Thursday 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Friday and Saturday 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Sunday- Closed Acceptance at other locations: . * I have never had another location before. I have been in the auto retail business for over 18 yrs., as well as in the restaurant business. I have always stressed customer satisfaction and easy to do business with are key for a good business. My main goal is to have a upscale image and be the best neighbor in the community. I . . Addressing potentially disturbing off-site impact: * Our off-site impact should be minimal at best. We do have our management on-site to handle any questions or concerns. All of our business is conducted on-site. Our staff is trained to abide by all traffic laws and motor vehicle operating specifications. We do a thorough background checks on all our employees. We have people of excellent character and strong moral ethics. . . . . . 1\~ M & N STRUCTURES, INC. 2841 Hedberg I?rive . Minnelonka, MN 55305 (952) 546-0800 . FAX (952) 546-0818 April 29, 2002 Mr. Gary Joh.nson Building Official City of Golden Valley Building Departmcnt 7300 Golden Valley Road Goldcn Valley, MN 55427 Re: 9010 Olson Memol"ialllighw:1Y Golden Valley, MN Dear Mr. Johnson: We have conducted a visual inspection of tile building located at 9010 Olson Memorial Highway and in our opinion; tllcouildlilg'ii stmcturally sound and capable of supporting a vehicle showroom operation. Should you have any questions regarding this determination, please don't hesitate to contact me. Cordially, ~ Kevin C. Niemeier, P.E. hFb ft. Jso~1 Cc: Mr. Morrie Wagener Mr. Steven T. Fichtel, Architect ~,,~Ut3"ll~g4' 9fJ>'tl C. t~ ~J ~\,~ ". 'lf/.f'~ ~~ -# t-i' ~4<-:-. "r:~ J'" ,,- "')'~ -:;~, .. r'rG'~irl)[fJ" ~1 .. \... t".I!:.1 .... Q . ~ .... rr;;:,q"'';'ltlllf:1 t ., 'hU .....1.'.1 1._ :'j.' .. . !! (1r....'.[1l 'I' .. . .!.~,M. ;'1 h .~~ .. 15/"1""-' .. .~....:.., ~ ~ \.!o/ {'-'':~ ~ ~,,~ ~. _.;-~~,,!..t.'" "'.." ,~.... .......-:-e...t.....,e. ...r,. ,;o..~ '" "OF t.,..,}';;o",,:~':o" "'1 . 1'.1-1'0' ,~.. "'OIt53~'tf,~ . . . MAIN ENTERANCE r N1 50 f7/ M U t..o /l. Jt J{ 65'-8" ~ - UPPER totr \ SCALE r-20' fl-Ap/oye~ Ar-t'~ {)>UK-S:, rJrnt-fS) 8 LEVEL f C> ~ ,.." ('> 79' . 65'-8" 1 ) . 0:\ v:, a' .u # ~ ~ ?> ~ ~ ~ c-. (\ 79' SCALE 20' r BASEMENT . . . .~ I '" lO 1- l~ ~V) ~~ 'fT] '-l hJ 1 L>~ :c 1- C..~J N lO 1- L" -::::. ~ T;1 ;:> 'llV '" - "" ~ '" ..<:. . '" -,,'" ~~ -:s .I. '\ ('0 V\ "... ,--,,' I ... 1<-" LI I I ;\> N GJ I- V; r;:. ~ ~ ~ ~ "'\ ;P I en a> 1- ~ :J ~"'If .,----!:!.-'2.'-? . )20 I 0> '"' ~ '^ ~ S ~ t'- f! ::.: ~ ~.- :'WJ ~ - ~ E .. r I ~'!fIP ::j "..) I' '! 0) lO 1- a> <: ('.. 7' - ('. - (\ \:f 'J-: ""\J - ? -....::. l\1 ~ C> ..,c n '" iP -< :r.. ~ N to '" I- N -:::::. ~ 1-- Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission April 22, 2002 Page 5 . 10. Whenever possible, private indivi al and group lessons shall be sc opening hours on Saturdays or Su days. 8. No tside music, loud speakers, r public address syste for occ . nal announcements and afety issues. 9. The pro shop hall remain a seco dary use to recreational uses of the facility f the building. 11. 12. If th rector of Plan gested during se ons, the time alleviate this con tion. 13. . 14. 15. F ure to comply with one or more of e above conditions shall be ground evocation of the conditional use per III. Informal Public Hearing - Conditional Use Permit (CU-96) Applicants: Minnetonka Motor Car Sales, Inc. (dba Morrie's Mazda) Address: Purpose: 9010 Olson Memorial Highway, Golden Valley, MN The Conditional Use Permit would allow for an automobile dealership on property in the Commercial zoning district. The applicant for this proposal was not in attendance. Grimes discussed Morrie's plans to operate a small dealership of previously owned cars at 9010 Olson Memorial Highway. He stated that Avis Rent-a-Car utilized this site in the early 1990's in a very similar way and discussed the parking plan. He stated that the information submitted by Morrie's indicates there are 57 outdoor spaces. Ten of the spaces are designated for customer parking and six of the spaces are designated for employee parking. The remaining 41 spaces are for the outdoor display of vehicles. He . discussed Morrie's plans to have three vehicles on a showroom floor inside the building . . . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission April 22, 2002 Page 6 and stated that Staff has asked Morrie's to submit a structural analysis to determine whether or not the floor can support three cars. Grimes stated that Morrie's is predicting about 150 customers per month, which equates to approximately 50 trips per day. He discussed Morrie's plans to enhance the existing building and the conditions of approval he is recommending in his memo dated April 18, 2002. Pentel asked how the cars would be dropped off on the site. Grimes stated that he has not discussed that with the applicant, but thought they might have an occasional drop-off on Golden Valley Road. Shaffer suggested adding a condition stating that cars are not to be parked in landscaped area. Grimes stated that he agreed. Eck stated that this site is pretty small and questioned what Morrie's is gaining by doing this. Grimes stated that he couldn't answer that and suggested that would be something to ask the applicant. Pentel opened the public hearing. Steve Johnson, 8951 Olson Memorial Highway, asked how long the lights would be on after the business is closed for the day. Groger explained that one of the conditions of approval would be that only the security lights can be on after 8:00 PM. Pentel questioned if a fence or bushes would help with the lighting issue. Johnson stated he is also concerned about noise. Eck asked if the lighting on the site was satisfactory when Avis utilized it. Johnson stated yes it was. Carole Aljadah, 8945 Olson Memorial Highway, stated that since 1983 when Avis was at the site there were lights on all of the time, constant ringing of a phone, and they were paging people constantly. She also stated that she wants to make sure that there isn't any expansion of car dealerships on Olson Memorial Highway. Eck asked Aljadah if she was satisfied with all of the changes the City had Avis make in regards to the lighting. Aljadah stated she didn't remember and stated she was concerned about increased crime. Arlen Turnquist, 433 Ensign Avenue North, stated he too has concerns about the lights and asked how willing the applicant would be to work with the neighborhood. Pentel explained that the lighting issue is covered as one of the conditions of approval and that if Morrie's doesn't follow the conditions, they won't get a conditional use permit. Groger suggested that it might be helpful to the neighbors if they read Staffs memo. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission April 22, 2002 Page 7 . Heidi Erickson, 820 Rhode Island Avenue South, stated that she works two doors down at AutoPoint, which does the exact same business. She stated that it would be excellent to have Morrie's Mazda at this location and that Morrie's is a great dealer. Hearing and seeing no one, Pentel closed the public hearing and stated that she would re-open it when the applicant is present. She stated that she would like to table this item to have a chance to talk to the applicant. Groger stC:'1ted that it seemed odd that they are only estimating 150 clients per month, because that would equal only 6 per day. McAleese told the Commissioners that they could still vote on the item and that it doesn't have to be tabled because the applicant is not present. John Liss, National Camera, owner of the land that Morrie's is proposing to use, stated that he didn't understand why the applicants weren't at the meeting because they seemed to be in a hurry to get this project started and they have a date set for closing on the property. MOVED by Hoffman, seconded by Groger and motion carried unanimously to table the request by Morrie's for a conditional use permit which would allow for an automobile dealership on property in the Commercial zoning district until the May 13, 2002 Planning Commission Meeting. . Pentel asked Staff to mail hearing notices again to properties located within 500 feet of the site. eport$ on Meetings of the Ho ing and Redevelop eil, Board of Zoning Appe Is and other Mee. gs Hoffman discusse City Council mee Conditional Use Permit nternational Haith 2002 Council meeting. V. Other Business A. Olson referred to th aft Telecommunicati s Ordinance tha Commissioners received with the' genda packets and state that he would like to I s this draft with the Commisso ers. . ~ .' . . . Regular eeting of the Golden Valley anning Commission May 13, 2002 A re ar meeting of the Planning Com ssion was held at the Golden Valley City Hall Counci ambers, 7800 Golden Valley oad, Golden Valley, Minnesot on Monday, May 13, 2 . Vice Chair Shaffer called he meeting to order at 7' M. Those present we Hoffman, McAleese, and Development Mark G s and City meeting were transcribed by L..: recording of the meeting.) I. Groger referred to page changed "Lake S ted that "Luke" Street should be Chair Pentel had a ddition to the April 11, she added the followl under section five, she has concerns about lecommunications towers being al ily Zoning Districts." MO D by McAleese, seconded by Rasmussen and motion carried unanimously to a rove the April 22, 2002 minutes with the above noted change and addition. II. Continued Informal Public Hearing - Conditional Use Permit (CU-96) Applicants: Minnetonka Motor Car Sales, Inc. (dba Morrie's Mazda) Address: 9010 Olson Memorial Highway, Golden Valley, MN Purpose: The Conditional Use Permit would allow for an automobile dealership on property in the Commercial zoning district. Grimes reminded the Commissioners that the above public hearing was a continuation from the April 22, 2002 Planning Commission meeting. He reviewed the site plan and reiterated that this use is similar to the way Avis Rental Cars used the site in the past. He discussed the concerns the neighbors had about lighting and stated that they have mentioned that if the lighting is the same as it was with the previous occupant they would be okay with that. . . . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission May 13, 2002 Page 2 Grimes stated that the site would have 57 parking space and the hours would be 9 AM to 8 PM Monday-Thursday and 9 AM to 6 PM Friday and Saturday. He stated that the City reserves the right to review the lighting plan and discussed the conditions listed in his memo dated April 18, 2002. Debbie Tufts, 13700 Wayzata Boulevard, Minnetonka, representing the applicant apologized for not being at the April 11 Planning Commission meeting and stated that Morrie's goal is to upgrade the property. She explained that they would be selling late year, high-end vehicles. She stated that the vehicles would be delivered to the Minnetonka store and individually driven to the Golden Valley location so there would be no large trucks dropping off vehicles on this site. Eck stated that this is a relatively small site and asked what the primary objective is. Tufts stated that Morrie's goal is to provide personalized service and that it is easier to do that with a smaller site versus a large site. Hoffman asked what kind of upgrading they are planning for the building. Tufts stated they would be sandblasting the outside of the building, adding a ramp and upgrading the interior. Hoffman asked how many vehicles they would have on the site at one time. Tufts stated that their goal is to sell 30 to 40 vehicles per month and that they would probably have approximately 50 vehicles on the lot. Shaffer opened the public hearing. Hearing and seeing no one, Shaffer closed the public hearing. Eck stated that if the lighting issues are satisfied he would be in favor of this proposal. Shaffer stated that low hedges around the parking area to shield headlights would be a good idea. McAleese stated that he would like to add to condition number two that no cars are to be parked in landscaped areas including setbacks. He also wants to add as a twelfth condition that all applicable state, local and federal requirements shall be met including the City's building, landscaping and fire codes. MOVED by McAleese, seconded by Groger and motion carried unanimously to approve the request for a Conditional Use Permit which would allow for an automobile dealership on property in the Commercial zoning district with the following conditions: 1. The site and building layouts submitted with the CUP application becomes a part of this approval. . . . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission May 13, 2002 Page 3 2. There shall be no more than 57 total cars on the site. All cars must be parked in designated parking spaces. At least 6 spaces shall be designated for employees and 10 spaces for customers. There shall be no parking on any landscaped areas including setbacks. 3. The hours of operation shall be limited to 9 AM to 8 PM Monday-Thursday, and 9 AM to 6 PM Friday-Saturday. There shall be no car sales on Sunday although the offices can be used. 4. City staff must approve any outdoor lighting plan. The City reserves the right to require that a lighting consultant chosen by the City to review any plan. The cost of the review would be born by Morrie's. After business hours, the lighting must be turned down to provide only security-type lighting. 5. No repair or maintenance work will be done on site other than car washing. 6. Any signage on the site shall meet the requirements of the City's sign ordinance. 7. There shall be no signage painted on any vehicle or window of any vehicle. There shall be no signage painted or placed on the inside or outside of any window of the building. 8. The display of balloons or other inflatable devices is prohibited. Any type of searchlights or laser lights is also prohibited. 9. The building may be used for the display of up to three vehicles along with offices. The basement may be used for storage. The Director of Inspections must first approve the display of vehicles in the building. 10. No outside speakers are to be used at this site. 11. Any outside trash containers must be screened with materials similar to that of the building. 12. All applicable state, local and federal requirements shall be met including the City's building, landscaping and fire codes. III. Informal Public Hearing - Zoni Code Text Amendment Applicant: No. 281 Address: Purpose: ,. -. . . . Bey Planning 763-593-8095 /763-593-8109 (fax) Date: June 5, 2003 To: Planning Commission From: Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development Subject: Amendment to Text of Industrial District in Zoning Code I am attaching a copy of a letter I received from Gary Gandrud, attorney for Hope for the City. In this letter, Mr. Gandrud is asking that the text of the Industrial district of the zoning code be changed in order to allow a portion of space in an industrial building to be used for retail space. Mr. Gandrud has suggested language to be added to the zoning code. I have met with Mr. Gandrud's client regarding this use. I will bring some information about Hope for the City to the meeting for your review. At this time, I am asking the Planning Commission for direction on this proposed change in order that I can get back to Hope for the City. If this type of change seems to make sense, it would be brought back to the Planning Commission for an informal public hearing. l,. . . . FAEGRE & BENSON LLP 2200 WELLS FARGO CENTER, 90 SOUTH SEVENTH STREET MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402-3901 TELEPHONE 612.766.7000 FACSIMILE 612.766.1600 www.faegre.com June 2, 2003 Mr. Mark Grimes Planning and Development Director City of Golden Valley 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427-4588 Re: Proposed Text Amendment in Industrial Zoning District Dear Mark: This purpose of the this letter is to propose a small text amendment (the "Amendment") to the City of Golden Valley's Zoning Ordinance (the "Ordinance"). A copy of the draft Amendment is attached as Exhibit A and, for the reasons which follow, I hope that you will support it. My client, Hope for the City, is a Minnesota-based 501 (c)(3) organization devoted to improving the lives of the Twin Cities' inner-city residents in. Hope for the City accomplishes this laudable objective by seeking, accepting, and organizing significant gifts of unsold merchandise from major corporations (including Target Corporation). Hope for the City then serves as a conduit for these donations, channeling them to needy individuals and other charitable organizations. As part of its mission, Hope for the City has also developed a supporting organization known as the Rock Bottom Thrift Store ("Rock Bottom"). Rock Bottom presently operates a store in Rockford, Minnesota, where it sells donated items that are unsuitable for direct use. All of the funds produced by such sales are then recycled to support Hope for the City. Recently, Rock Bottom has been seeking alternative locations in which to open a second outlet, and for a variety of reasons the preferred location is in a building located at 1200 Mendelssohn Avenue North in Golden Valley (the "Building"). The Building consists of 52,224 square feet. Rock Bottom would devote portions of the premises to office and warehouse uses, as well as 3,228 feet to retail space. Unfortunately, the Building is located in the City's Industrial Zoning District, where retail uses are not permitted. Minnesota Colorado Iowa London Frankfurt Shanghai ~ . . . Mr. Tom Burt June 2, 2003 Page 2 In order to permit Rock Bottom to operate in the Building, Hope for the City respectfully requests a minor amendment to the Ordinance. Proposed language for such an amendment is attached to this letter as Exhibit A. In addition to addressing Hope for the City's immediate need for space, the proposed Amendment is compatible with the defined purposes of the Industrial Zoning District. Section 11.36, Subdivision 1, of the Ordinance states that the purpose of the Industrial Zoning District is to "provide for the establishment of industrial and manufacturing development and uses along with directly related and complementary uses which, because of the nature of the product or character of activity, requires isolation from residential and commercial areas." (Emphasis added.) In this case, Hope for the City's plans for the Building are just such a complementary use because, although it is an important charitable activity, a thrift store is precisely the type of retail enterprise that should be isolated from residential and commercial areas. As a result, I believe that the Amendment is a rational and important change to the Ordinance, which I urge you to support. Si cerely YO~WlQ d . . . EXHIBIT A Proposed Text Amendment Section 11.36. Subdivision 3(L) "L. General retail services and or sales by non-profit entities, provided such sales are conducted in less than ten percent (10%) of the building's Gross Floor Area." . . . Planning 763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax) Date: June 5,2003 To: Planning Commission From: Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development Subject: Preliminary Review of draft Residential district of zoning code and fence code At the May 12, 2003 Planning Commission meeting, staff had the draft of the Residential district zoning code and the fence code for your consideration. It was decided that these ordinances would be discussed at the June 9, 2003 meeting. I have already made a change to the Residential zoning code as related to accessory buildings and decks. Due to changes in the building code, the state no longer allows a city to require a building permit for decks less than 30 inches in height. If a building permit is not required, staff believes it is important that we know that the deck meets setback requirements. Staff has suggested that the City require a zoning permit indicating the location of decks less than 30 inches in height. In addition, staff is recommending that a zoning permit be issued for accessory building less than 120 sq. ft. in area. These small accessory buildings do not require building permits but are often placed too close to property lines or the main structure. It is hoped that requiring a zoning permit for these small accessory buildings will help to eliminate their misplacement on a Jot. In addition, the staff would like to begin discussion on the amendment of the comprehensive plan for locating additional areas for higher density housing. Some information was given to the Planning Commission for the May 12, 2003 meeting. I know that there is additional information needed from staff but the information provided by Mr. Zachman (townhome developer in GoldenValley who has purchased three of the homes at the southeast corner of Winnetka and TH 55) is a place to start the discussion. I think that Mr. Zachman will be at the meeting to hear the discussion. . SECTION 11.21. SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT (R-1 ). Subdivision 1. Purpose. The purpose of the Rosidential R-1 Zoning District is to provide for single-family, detached dwelling units at a low density along with directly related and complementary uses. Subdivision 2. District Established. Properties shall be established within the R-1 Residenti31 Zoning District in the manner provided for in Section 11.90, Subdivision 3 of this Chapter, and when thus established shall be incorporated in this Section 11.21, Subdivision 2 by an ordinance which makes cross-reference to this section 11.21 and which shall become a part hereof and of Section 11.10, Subdivision 2 thereof, as fully as if set forth herein. In addition the R-1 Residential Zoning Districts thus established and/or any subsequent changes to the same which shall be made and established in a similar manner, shall be reflected in the official zoning map of the City as provided in Section 11.11 of this Chapter. Subdivision 3. Usos Permitted Uses. The following uses and no other shall be permitted in the R-1 Residential Zoning Districts: A. Country est3tes and GRe-Sinqle-family dwellings. . B. When the property owner resides on the premises, grental of rooms to not more than two people for lodging purposes only. C. Name plates not exceeding one square foot in area. E. Garages, as defined in this Chapter. ~ C. Residential facilities serving six or fewer persons. J=h D. Manufactured homes, as defined in this Chapter. * E. Foster family homes. b F. Essential Services - Class I Subdivision 4. Accessory Uses. The followinq accessory uses and no other shall be permitted in the R-1 Zoninq Districts: . .g, 8.:.- Accessory buildings, includinq private qaraqes, as defined in this Chapter. 1. Accessory buildinqs less than 120 square feet in area require a Zoninq Permit issued by the Director of Planninq and Development. The fee for the Zoning Permit is established by the City Council. . . . The purpose of the Zoninq Permit is to insure that accessory buildinqs are located in a conforminq location on the lot. ~ B. Home occupations, as regulated by this Section. G: C. Home Gday care facilities licensed by the State of Minnesota serving 12 or fewer persons~in accordance '/lith Minnesota Statutes Annotated 215.812, Subdivision 3. Subdivision 43. 5. Conditional Uses. The follo'Ning conditional uses may be allo'o\'ed after review by the Planning Commission and approval by the Council f-oIlO\...ing the standards and proceduros set forth in this Chapter. A. Residential facilities serving from +- seven to 25 persons. B. Group foster family homes. Subdivision 4. 6. Lot Requiremonts For Platting Buildable Lots. No dwelling or accessory building shall be erected for use or occupancy as a residential dwelling on any tract of unplatted land which does not conform with the requirements of this Section, except on those AU lots located within an approved plat~ shall be regarded as buildable lots. Tracts, or parcels of land, described by metes and bounds may bo regarded 3S buildable lots provided they are at least 12,500 square f-eet in area and at least 100 foot in width at the building setback line. In the R-1 Residential Zoning District a platted lot of a minimum area of 10,000 square feet (and a minimum width of 80 feet at--tAe minimum required front setback line) shall be required for one family housed in one building. Subdivision 5. Lot Aroa, One Family. In the R..1 Residential Zoning District a platted lot of a minimum area of 10,000 square feet (and a minimum ':.'idth of 80 foot at the minimum roquired front setback line) shall be required for one family housed in one building. Subdiyision 6. Unplatted Property. No d....'elling or accessory building shall be erected for use or occupancy as a residential d'....elling on any tract of unplatted land which does not conform 'lJith the requirements of this Soction. Subdivision 8. 7. Corner Visibility. Between the right of way lines of intersecting streets and a line joining points on such lines 25 foot distant from their point of intersection, or in the case of a rounded corner, the point of intersection of the tangents, no building or structure may be erected and no vegetation, other than shade trees trimmed up a distance of at least 10 f-eet above the curb line, may be maintained above a height of three foet above the piano through their curb grades, for the purpose of corner visibility. All buildinqs . . . and structures in the R-1 Zoninq District shall meet the requirements of the corner visibility requirements in Chapter 7 of the City Code. Subdivision 8. Easements. No buildinqs or structures in the R-1 ZOhinq District shall be located in dedicated public easements. Subdivision 9. Lot Coveraae. No lot or parcel in the R-1 Zoninq District shall have a lot coveraqe of more than 30 percent. Subdivision 10. Principal Buildinas. Subiect to the modifications in Subdivision 12. below. principal buildinqs in the R-1 Zoninq District shall be qoverned by the followinq requirements: A. Subdiyision 7. Setback Requirements. The following building setbacks shall be required for principal buildinqs in the R-1 Rosidential Zoning District. G:- Garages or other accessory structures buildinqs which are attached to the house or main structure shall also be governed by these setback requirements, of this Chapter v..hich pertain to tho main structuro. except for stair landinqs UP to 25 square feet in size and for handicapped ramps. A-: .:l Front Setback. The required front setback shall be ~ 30 feet from tAe m!Y..front property line and 35 f-eet from any side or rear property line which is also a alonq a street or road right-of-way line.:... but this requirement shall not reduco the building '....idth of any corner lot to less than 22 foot at tho ground story level. B. 2. Rear Setback. The required rear setback shall be 20 percent of the lot depth. G:- 3. Side Setback. Side yard setbacks are determined by the lot width at the minimum required front setback line. The distance between any part of a buildinq dwelling or structure and the side lot lines shall be governed by the following requirements: 1. In tho case of lots having a 'A'idth of 100 f-oot or greater, tho sido sotback shall be 15 feot; ~ a. In the case of lots having a width greater than 7() 65 feet and loss than 100 feet, the side setback shall be 15 percent of the lot wiatR 1 0 feet: ~ b. In the case of lots having a width of +G-65 feet or less, the North or West side setback shall be 10 percent of the lot width, and the South or East side setback shall be 20 percent of the lot width. . . . ~Subdivision 10. Height Limitations. No principal building shall be erected in the R-1 Residential Zoning District to exceed a heiqht of tAFee two and a half stories or 30 feet as defined in the City's buildinq code. whichever is less. in hoight. C. Subdivision 11. Building Width Requirements. No principal building shall be less than 22 feet in width as measured from the exterior of the exterior walls. unless 3 condition31 use permit is issued in accordance with the provisions of this Ch3ptor. D. Subdivision 9. Cornices and Eaves. Cornices and eaves may not project more than tRif:ty 30 inches into a required opon spaco or setback. E. Decks. Decks over eiqht inches from qround level shall meet the same setbacks as the principal buildinq. Subdivision -1-2. 11. Accessory Buildings. Subiect to the modifications in Subdivision 12. below. A~ccessory buildings, as herein definod, shall be governed by the following requirements: A. Location and Setback Requirements. The followinq location requlations and setbacks shall be required for accessory buildings in the R-1 Zoninq District: A. Detachod accessory buildings shall bo loc3tod wholly to tho rear of the house or main building to which it is incidental \Nith at least 10 feet of separation between tho m3in building and the accessory building or buildings. V'/hon so pbcod, tho 3CCOSSOry building or buildings shall be no less th3n 5 feet dist3nt from any lot boundary line other than 3 stroet line and no less than 35 feet distant from lot boundary line ,..,hich is 31so a street lino. 1. Location. Detached accessory buildinqs shall be located completelv to the rear of the principal buildinQ. unless it is built with frost footinqs. In that case. an accessory buildinq may be built no closer to the front setback as the principal buildinq. For corner lots. accessory buildinqs shall meet this location requirement for the front corner onlv. not the corner side. 2. Front Setback. The required front setback shall be 30 feet from the front property line alonQ a street riqht-of-wav line. 3. Side and Rear Setbacks. Accessory buildinqs shall be located no less than 5 feet from a side or rear yard property line. 4. Separation between buildinqs. Accessory buildinqs shall be located no less than 10 feet from any principal building and from any other accessory buildinq. . . . B. Heiqht Limitations. No accessory buildinq shall be erected in the R-1 ZoninQ District to exceed a heiqht of one stOry. which is 10 feet to the top plate line. C. Provision for garage. No building permit shall be issued with respect to the main structure for a single family dwelling not having a garage unless the registered survey submitted at the time of the application for the building permit is mado reflects the necessary amount of area and setback requirements for a future qaraQe. space for the location of a garage, ':.'hich will meet the setbacks and other requirements of this Section. D. Cornices and Eaves. Cornices and eaves may not project more than 30 inches into a required setback. E. Each property is limited to a total of 1.000 square feet of the followinQ accessory buildinqs: detached and attached qaraqes. and detached sheds. qreenhouses. and qazebos. Swimminq pools are not included in this requirement. F. Size of Accessory buildinq. No accessory buildinQ shall be larqer in size than the principal buildinq. G. Swimminq pools. Below qround swimminq pools shall meet the same setback and location requirements for accessory buildinqs. Setbacks shall be measured from the property line to the pool's edqe. Decks surrounding above qround pools shall meet setback requirements. H. Decks. Free standinq or decks attached to accessory buildinqs shall meet the same setback requirements for accessory buildings. I. Air conditioninq units shall not be allowed in the front yard of a sinQle familv home. Subdivision 12. Pre-1982 Buildinas. For all buildinQs constructed in the R-1 ZoninQ District prior to January 1. 1982. the followinq buildinQ setbacks shall be in effect. A. Front yard - The buildinQ setback for principal buildinQs shall be no closer than 25 feet to the front yard property line. B. Side yard - The buildinQ setback for principal buildinos shall be no closer than three feet to the side yard property line. C. Rear yard - The buildinQ setback for principal buildings shall be no closer than three feet to the rear yard property line. . . . D. Accessory buildinq - The buildinq setback for accessory buildinqs shall be no closer than three feet to the side or rear yard property lines. At the discretion of the Director of Planninq and Development. a property owner may be required to move an accessory buildinq if it is located in a public easement area. Subdivision 13. Temporary Outdoor StoraQe. Temporary Outdoor Storaqe in the R-1 Zoninq District shall be aoverned by the followina requirements: A. Duration. Temporary outdoor storaqe units shall not be stored on a property for more than seven days. B. Location: Temporary outdoor storaqe units shall be stored on a hard surface and be located completely on private property. Subdivision 14. Drivewav Requirements. Driveways in the R-1 Zoninq District shalf be qoverned by the folfowinq requirements: A. Driveways shalf be constructed of hard surface materials such as asphalt. pavers, or concrete. B. Driveways shalf be setback three feet from a side yard property line, except for shared driveways aqreed to by both property owners in a private easement aqreement. Subdivision 15. Decks and Platforms. Decks and platforms not more than 30 inches but greater than 8 inches above adiacent qrade and not attached to a structure with frost footinas and Which is not part of an accessible route shall require a Zoninq Permit issued by the Director of Planninq. The fee for the Zoninq Permit is established by the City Council. The purpose of the Zoning Permit is to insure that decks areater than 8 inches but less than 30 inches in heiaht are located in a conformina location on the lot. Subdivision .f4 16. Home Occupation Requirements. A. Home occupations in the R-1 Zoninq District shalf be governed by the following requirements: 1. The use of the dwelling for the occupation or profession shalf be incidental and secondary to the use of the dwelling for residential purposes. 2. The exterior appearance of the structure shalf not be altered for the operation of the home occupation. . . . 3. There shall be no outside storage or display of anything related to the home occupation. 4. The home occupation shall not be permitted in an accessory building or garage. An accessory buildinq. includinq a qaraqe. shall not be used for a home occupation. 5. Notwithstanding that a use may be a A permitted occupation in a residential district, it-shall not result in noise, fumes, traffic, lights, odor, excessive water use or qarbaqe service, electrical, radio or TV interference in a manner detrimental to the health, safety, enjoyment and general welfare of the surrounding residential neighborhood. 6. No physical products shall be displayed or sold on the premises except such that are incidental to the permitted home occupation. 7. No signs or symbols shall be displayed other than those permitted for residential purposes. 8. Clients, deliveries and other business activity where persons come to the home shall be limited to between the hours of g.;.QQ AM and a~ PM. g. No more than 20 percent of the gross floor area of the dwelling shall be used for the home occupation. 10. No home occupation shall generate traffic, parking, se'lolage or water uses or garbage services which are detrimental to the health, safety, welfare and enjoyment of the residential area. .:t4- 10. Parking related to the home occupation shall be provided onlv on the driveway of the property where the home occupation operates. At no time shall parking be permitted on the street. ~.1L A home occupation shall not generate more than eight client trips per day and serve no more than two clients or customers at a time. ~ 12. All other applicable City, State and Federal licenses, codes and regulations mtISt shall be met. B. The follo'Ning are permitted home occupations provided they meet the provisions of this Section: 1. Dressmaking, sewing and tailoring. . . . 2. P3inting, sculpturing, writing or photography. 3. Telephone 3ns'A'ering 3nd secretarial services. '1. Home cr3fts such 3S model making, rug weaving, 13pid3ry \A,lork 3nd c3binet making. 5. Tutoring, teaching or instruction limited to one student at one time. 6. Rep3ir and service of the following: sm311 eloctric31 appliances, radios, typewriters, cameras and other itoms th3t may be c3rriod by one person except for the repair and service of any item involving an internal combustion engine or motor. 7. Hair C3ro services. 8. Computer services. G:- B. The following uses are prohibited home occupations: 1. Repair, service, buildinQ, or painting of autos, trucks boats and other vehicles. 2. Restaurants or cafes. 3. Animal Hospital. 4. Veterinarian. 5. Funeral Home or mortuary. 6. Medical Clinic. 7. Stable or kennel. 8. Repair shops other than those permitted in sub paragraphs, above. Repair and service of the f{)IIO'.ving: sm311 electric31 appliances, radios, typev:riters, c~meras and other items that may cannot be carried by one person and except for the repair and service of any item involving an internal combustion engine or motor. 9. Gift or antique shop. 10. Sale or repair of firearms. . . . ation th3t is not detriment~1 to o ^ ny proposod hom~ occup d not specifically permlttod . "II e 01 a resident".1 area aR S b ar<lgraph C, tho health, solely ~nd ;:::,r Ror spooifioally prohibited ~Yd o~ cioniod by tho by S~bpaFagraph . ~ d a condilional uso and gr<ln 0, d in Subparagraph A. R II se GenSI ere . ts Gent3lne abovo..tu:on co~~idorffiion 01 those FO(UI;:~~~g to' ;"'nditional uses. Councl d tho pro"isions of thiS Chap er 3bove,3n . . Key: . Underlined wording - new language . Strikethrough wording - current language to be deleted language SECTION 4.07. FENCES AND SCREENING. Subdivision 1. Definitions. 1. "Berm" - An earthen mound desiQned to provide visual interest on a site, screen undesirable views, reduce noise, or fulfill other such purposes. 2. "Fence" - An enclosure. barrier or wall. such as wooden posts. wire. and iron. used as a boundary. means of protection. privacy screeninq or confinement. but not includinq hedqes. shrubs. trees. or other natural Qrowth. 3. "Parapet" - That portion of a wall which extends above the roof line. . 4. "Screeninq" - A method of visually shieldinq or obscurinq one abuttinq or nearby structure or use from another by fencinq, walls. berms, or densely planted veQetation. Subdivision 3. General Requirements. These requirements apply to fences in all zoninq districts. A. The finished side of a fence shall face the adiacent property. B. All fences shall comply with the corner visibility requirements in Chapter 7 of the City Code. C. All fences. includinq the footinQs. shall be located entirely upon the private property reQuestinQ the construction of the fence. It is the homeowner's responsibility to determine property lines prior to installinQ a fence. D. Electrical fences. except as allowed in Subdivision 4 of this Section, and chicken wire fences used as a property line fence. are prohibited. Barbed wire fences are prohibited except as allowed in Subdivision 4 of this Section. . 1 . . . E. Fences more than six (6) fect in heiaht require n buildina permit. Fences six feet in heiaht or less still require a fence permit issued by the Director of Plannina and Development. The fee for such permit is established by the City Council. The purpose of the Fence Permit is to insure that fences are placed in a conformina location on a property and to meetina the requirements of this section. Fences used to enclose an outdoor pool shall not require a fence permit. F. All fences shall be maintained and kept in aood repair. Any fence that is potentially danaerous. or in disrepair shall be removed or repaired. G. At the discretion of the Inspections Department desianee. fences over eiaht (8) feet in heiaht may require desian by an enQineer. H. Outdoor swimmina pools shall be enclosed within a minimum five (5) foot hiah fence with a self-Iockina Qate. The fence must not have an openina areater than four (4) inches from the around nor be of a readily climbable desian. I. No temporary fence. such as a snow fence or erosion control fence. shall be permitted on any property for a period in excess of thirty (30) days unless approved by the Public Works Department. Subdivision 4. Reaulations bv Zonina District. The followinq additional reaulations shall apply to specific zonina districts. A. Sinale Family Residential (R-1). Two-Family (R-2). and Multiple Dwellina zonina districts. 1. Fences in the front yard are limited to four (4) feet in heiaht. Fences in side and rear yards are limited to eiaht (8) feet in height. 2. Low voltaae electric fences are allowed UP to a heiaht of seven (7) feet in the rear yard only of the R-1 and R-2 zonina districts. 3. "Invisible Fences" (underaround electric fences) to control movement of domestic animals are permitted in any zonina district. B. Commercial. Institutional. and Business and Professional Offices zonina districts. Fences in the Commercial. Institutional. and Business and Professional Offices zonina districts are limited to four (4) feet in the front yard and to eiaht (8) feet in side and rear yards. 2 . . . c. Lioht Industrial and Industrial zonino districts. 1. C. Screening. 1\11 princip~l, accessory, ~nd conditional uses, except business signs, '::hich ~re situated within 50 f.eet of a Residential Zoning District or an R 2 Zoning District sh~1I be screened and buff-ered from such Zoning District by a separation of open space which shall ha'/e a minimum depth of 30 feet, and shall include 3 required fence or vegetative screening of not less than 90 percent opacity, and not less than 6 feet in height ~bove the level of the said Residential or R 2 Zoning District. For those Lioht Industrial and Industrial zoned properties adiacent to properties zoned Sinole Family Residential (R-1), Two Family Residential (R-2), Multiple Dwellino, and Institutional, all raw materials, supplies, finished or semi-finished products and equipment shall be stored within a completely enclosed buildino, or within the confines of a 100 percent opaque wall or fence not less than 6 feet in heioht, or by veoetative screenino of not less than 90 percent opacity. 2. Stor~ge. All ra':.' m~terials, supplies, f~nished or semi finished products and equipment shall be stored v:ithin a completely enclosed building, or \Nithin the confines of a 100 percent opaque w~1I or f.ence not less than 6 feet in height. All waste material, debris, refuse, junk or damaged vehicles shall be either kept entirely within an enclosed building:. , or completely screened from public streets and adj~cent property. 3. Fences in the Lioht Industrial and Industrial zoning districts are limited to eioht (8) feet in heioht. 4. Barbed wire fences are allowed in the Light Industrial and Industrialzonino districts. However, the barbed wire cannot be used at a heioht lower than six (6) feet six (6) inches, and the overall height of the fence includino the barbed wire cannot exceed eight (8) feet in heioht. Subdivision 5. Dog Kennels. Fencino around doo kennels shall be limited to eioht (8) feet in heioht. Doo kennels shall be located in the rear yard of a property. Subdivision 6. Screening of Mechanical Equipment. All mechanicals on the roof or oround shall either be screened from view from the street rioht of way by an architectural element such as a parapet. a fence approved by the Inspection Department. or by veoetative screenino of not less than 90 percent opacity. 3 If . . . Subdivision 7. Screenina of Dumpsters. All dumpsters shall be screened from view so as to match with materials used for the construction of the principal buildinQ. 4