Loading...
10-13-03 PC Agenda AGENDA GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting Golden Valley City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Road Council Chambers Monday, October 13, 2003 7pm I. Approval of Minutes - September 22, 2003 Planning Commission Meeting II. Informal Public Hearing - Conditional Use Permit (CU-103) Applicant: Health Care Plus, Inc. Address: 4949 Olson Memorial Highway Purpose: To allow for an adult day care facility. III. Informal Public Hearing - Minor Subdivision - (SU09-05) Applicant: Paul & Rozalija Gannon Address: 508 Westwood Drive South and 4510 Strawberry Lane Purpose: To allow an existing lot to be divided into two lots for the construction of a new house. IV. Informal Public Hearing -Conditional Use Permit.- (CU-104) Applicant: Hope for the City Address: 1200 Mendelssohn Avenue Purpose: To allow retail sales in the Light Industrial Zoning District -- Short Recess -- V. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings VI. Other Business Single Family Residential Zoning Code text changes will be discussed at the November 11, 2003 Council Manger Meeting at 7 pm. VII. Adjournment . . . Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 22, 2003 A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held at the Golden Valley City Hall Council Chambers, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota, on Monday, September 22, 2003. Vice Chair Shaffer called the meeting to order at 6 m. Those present were Commissioners Eck, Groger, Keysser, McAlees Shaffer. Also present were Director of Planning and Developmen a Administrative Assistant, Lisa Wittman. Chair Pentel was abse I. Discussion of the Housing Policy and developing c density housing. Grimes stated that he and Chair Pentel recently than locating specific areas for higher density d come up with criteria for these types of develop do a Comprehensive Plan amendment or would have some criteria for them to fo ht that rather it d be better to n someone wanted to g development the City Shaffer suggested higher density arterial streets. be located on collector and Rasmussen stated that m planning for higher dens. considered. eet access needs to be looked at when the traffic volume also needs to be Eck asked if there a developer cou arena and tat the soil c site. ped or undeveloped sites, with poor soil that a . erred to the original location for the Breck ice cation turned out to be unsuitable for Breck because of it may be suitable for apartments to be located on that ixed-use developments with residential and commercial together. Shaffer suggested looking at buffer sites between residential areas and commercial or industrial areas. Groger suggested looking at the condition and value of properties as criteria when properties are being redeveloped. McAleese referred to the PUD list of items to consider and stated that all of those items would apply to higher density type of redevelopments. . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 22,2003 Page 2 Grimes suggested considering the type of housing as a criteria. McAleese said that that criteria would apply more to the City's housing goals. Shaffer asked if the City could tell developers that there is a preference for a certain type of housing. McAleese said he thinks that is good for a policy but if developers are not providing affordable housing they need to explain why. Grimes stated that utilities and ponding should be looked at because th typically large scale developments. He stated that having green spac kids to play is a concern to him on developments that are family or" n III tions where the the area by sites that are noisy or Rasmussen stated that it isn't a matter of where the housing i don't want high density developments near them. Grimes s the issues with these types of developments. Grimes asked the Commission if they thought ther City might not want high density developments. Lupient Automotive. Groger stated that areas n dirty wouldn't be appropriate. . McAleese stated that safety is one iss should not be a criterion and that d homeowners. to a shopping center '11i>e more honest with potential Rasmussen asked if the id stated that if would be e have something to judge criteria is to help the developers. Grimes some criteria then the City could at least n. II. ember 8, 2003 Planning Commission Meeting MOVED by Ra approve t con ed by Groger and motion carried unanimously to 003 minutes as submitted. 'c Hearing - Minor Subdivision - 5U12-09 Edward Soppa Address: 1135 Welcome Circle Purpose: To allow an existing lot to be divided into two lots. . Grimes explained that the applicant is requesting to divide his property located at the northwest corner of Welcome Avenue and Welcome Circle into two lots. He stated that the property is 30,438 square feet in area and that, when done, both lots would greatly . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 22, 2003 Page 3 exceed the 10,000 square foot area requirement. He added that all of the setback requirements are being met on both lots. He stated that one of the biggest concerns of the neighborhood is drainage and how the new property would affect the drainage issues that already exist in that area. Grimes said that he spoke with the City Engineer and the City's Environmental Coordinator and it is their opinion that a new home on this property would not have a negative impact to the adjoining properties. He explained that part of th . 'ng permit process would include obtaining a grading, drainage and erosion co Eck as if the applicant would be required to removed as a result of this subdivision. the tree preservation plan. Grimes stated that the proposed new lot already has stubs in pi and that they were probably put there in anticipation of this su explained that there will be a park dedication fee of $1 ,000 plat is approved. Grimes stated that staff is recommending approval sketch submitted by the applicant. that would need to be is lot will not be subject to . Shaffer asked if all of the conditi said yes. a subdivision are being met. Grimes Keysser referred to the the drainage issue beca neighbor's yard. n the survey and asked for clarification about four foot difference from the new lot to the Grimes stated yard where wa Engineer develo, g is that there is a low spot in a neighboring back times of a lot of rain. He explained again that the City age issues would be looked at when the new house is ading, drainage and erosion control permit process. S plicant if he had anything further to add to Grimes' report. Soppa ing further to add. the public hearing. James Heigl, 1129 Welcome Circle stated that his only issue is with the drainage. He showed the Commissioners pictures of his backyard play structure with water covering the bottom portion. . . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 22,2003 Page 4 Groger asked where the water drains to eventually. Heigl stated that the water drains into the ground or he pumps it into the street. Groger explained that the grading, drainage and erosion control permit could help minimize the drainage problems. Ann Bennion, 1125 Welcome Circle stated that there is a drainage issue and at one juncture she talked to the City about putting in a storm sewer and the answer she got back was that everyone has to be responsible for their own property. She stated that the trees that are on the lot now are soaking up some of the water and ing them out could compound the problem. Her concern is that a new home w e drainage situation worse. Eck stated that everything f he feels for the neighbor would not be exacerbate drainage and erosi on is to the e drainage e suggested it. rimes said that a drain were to be es stated that there could t the City doesn't want to the construction of the . John Hunter, 1255 Welcome Avenue North stated he has as. back yard and there has been water there many times so hi shed. He said he doesn't see how raising the newly created problem because if something is raised the water has4 putting in a drain so that all three properties affect is something to talk to the City Engineer about. put in it would be assessed to the benefiting pr be ways to improve the drainage situation i make any situation worse and hopefully. house. Seeing and hearing no one, Sh I standpoint seemed to be in order. He said . y needs to ensure that the drainage problem a and stated that as part of the grading, it that wouldn't happen. hould require a utility easement. Grimes stated that ase ent they can get it. Groger asked if a condition Id be added to the recommendation for approval. McAleese ditions placed on this subdivision because the law basically 't den a subdivision if it meets all of the requirements. He said the hat the situation won't get worse. if the issue of title review should be listed as a condition. Grimes said it is usually p to the City Attorney if title review is necessary or not. McAleese agreed as long as the applicant understood that the City Attorney could do a title search in the future. Shaffer asked if the Commission could make two motions, one for the subdivision request and one to recommend to the City Council to direct staff to look at the drainage issues. Grimes said that two motions could be made. . . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 22, 2003 Page 5 MOVED by McAleese, seconded by Eck and motion carried unanimously to approve the requested subdivision with the following conditions. 1. The final plat of Soppa Addition will be consistent with the sketch plan for the Soppa Addition submitted with the minor subdivision application. The sketch plan was prepared by Pioneer Engineering and dated 7/21/03. MOVED by Groger, seconded by McAleese and moti City Staff to review the drainage issues adjacent t that the City could take to improve the situation. 2. The comments in the memo from City Engineer Jeff Oliver, PE, to Director of Planning and Development, dated August 8, 2003 sh this approval. 3. A park dedication fee shall be paid in the amount of $100 final plat by the City Council. sly to direct r potential solutions . IV. Reports on Meetings of the H Council, Board of Zoning lopment Authority, City Meetings Keysser reported on the Septemb preliminary plans for the Calv unci! meeting. He stated that the amendment were approved. V. Other Business A.) Single Family Residential Zoning District (R-1)- Code. ersion of the Single Family Residential Zoning District is going to a Council/Manager meeting so that the Council iew it before there is a public hearing. to ubdivision 13(C) and stated that it was supposed to be changed n 14 regarding recreational vehicles. . Eck stated that there are some home occupations that aren't really home occupations in that the business is not conducted on the premises and employees just go to the home and leave their cars there and then go work someplace else. Grimes said that his interpretation of the Code is that that would not be an allowed use. Eck referred to Subdivision 17(A)(3) regarding home occupations and that nothing is supposed to be stored or displayed on site. He asked Grimes if he felt that this subdivision is adequate. Grimes stated that the City does allow a certain size . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 22, 2003 Page 6 commercial vehicle in residential areas. Shaffer added that Subdivision 17(A)(12) covers that issue because only one employee is allowed. McAleese asked if Subdivision 13 regarding temporary storage included PODS storage systems. Grimes stated yes and that the City is trying to limit how long PODS units can be stored on a property to 7 days and that they can't be put on the street. MOVED by Groger, seconded by Keysser and motion carried unanimo approve Draft #6 of the Single Family Residential Zoning District (R- of the City Code with the additional language being provided by S VI. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 7:45 pm . . . n Planning 763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax) Date: October 6,2003 To: Planning Commission From: Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development Subject: Informal Public Hearing on Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to Allow Adult Day Center at 4949 Olson Memorial Highway-Health Care Plus, Inc., Applicant . Background Health Care Plus, represented by its president David Olshansky, has applied for a conditional use permit (CUP) in order to operate an adult day care center at 4949 Olson Memorial Highway. Their plan is to use the entire building for the adult day care. The building is about 8400 sq. ft. in size on one level. The property is zoned Business and Professional Offices. Within that zoning district, adult day care is allowed with a CUP. Adult day care is also allowed with a CUP in the Commercial, Industrial, Light Industrial, and Institutional zoning districts. In no zoning district is adult day care permitted by right. The General Land Use Plan Map for this property indicates that it is guided for Office uses. The building at 4949 OMH was constructed in 1961. It has been the offices of the American Federation of Grain Millers. The building and site has changed little since its construction except for a small addition built on to the northwest corner of the building in 1971. The site now has about 20 parking spaces that have seemed to meet the demand for the office building over the years. There is access to the site from one driveway off the south frontage road. Proposed Use of Building and Site Health Care Plus plans to convert the entire building to be used for adult day care as outlined in the attached letter to the Planning Commission dated August 22, 2003. The hours of operation are from 8:30 am to 5 pm weekdays with the possibility of being open on Saturday. The letter indicates that they will serve up to 60 clients with 8 staff. Since this letter was submitted, Health Care Plus has told me that they will be asking for a state license to serve 90 persons that would require a staff of 16. They have told City staff that they will not be serving 90 right away but the building has the capacity so they want to get approval for the larger number. According to Health Care Plus, the building and site is large enough to meet state standards for serving 90 clients. . The Zoning Code requires that adult day care provide one parking space for five clients and one parking space for each staff member. In this case, the total parking spaces required would be 34. The site plan indicates that they have 34 spaces with the planned parking lot expansion to the south. Health Care Plus has told me that the use of all 34 spaces is highly unlikely because . . . Metro Mobility or other services drop off the great majority of the clients. Very few or any of the clients would drive to the adult day care. Staff is somewhat concerned about access to the site by larger vehicles such as a Metro Mobility bus or ambulance. The applicant has spoken with Metro Mobility about the size of their buses and the ability of those buses to maneuver in the parking lot. They have provided the City with a plan indicating that the buses can get through the parking lot without issues. It also appears that more than one bus can be on the site at one time without problems. Because Health Care Plus has said that they do not need all 34 spaces, staff is suggesting that a proof of parking be permitted for up to 8 spaces to allow for improved maneuvering space on the property. This could increase the 16 ft. aisle width along the east and west side to allow for easier access by the larger vehicles. The existing driveway into the site is only 18 ft. wide. However, it is wide enough to handle two large vehicles to pass. As noted in the memo from Deputy Fire Marshal Ed Anderson, the building will have an automatic fire suppression sprinkler system that will greatly enhance fire protection. Also, the owner will have to meet whatever requirements the Fire Department requires for emergency vehicle access. This may include fire lanes along both sides of the north/south driveway into the site. The building and parking now take up about half of the 1.17 acre site. With the expansion of the parking area to the west, another 8-10,000 sq. ft. will be developed. A significant area of trees will remain between the parking area and the railroad tracks. The development of the site will be subject to a tree preservation plan. The property to the east is currently operated by Head Start (Parents in Community Action). They serve up to 92 children each weekday and there are approximately 25 employees. The children are brought to the site by buses that are similar in size to Metro Mobility buses. The City has not received any complaints about the operation of the Head Start program at this location. This site has similar width driveway for bus access. In addition, this site has to accommodate an outdoor play area. The property to the west is an office building. To the south across the railroad tracks is Breck School. North of the site is TH 55 with the Edina Realty building and the vacant White House site. Currently, the HRA owns the White House site and the HRA is negotiating a development agreement with an assisted living developer for the construction of a 90 unit building. The City also maintains a park to the north of TH 55. Access to the site is from the south TH 55 frontage road. There is a signal at TH 55 and Schaper Dr. that provides good access to the area. The frontage road east of Schaper Rd. is a dead-end. The frontage road to the west provides access to the Cloverleaf Dr. area and to the west under TH 100 near Meadowbrook School. Factors for Consideration for Review of CUP In approving or denying any CUP, City Code requires that findings be made on ten specified factors. Staff evaluation of those factors as they relate to the current proposal area as follows: 1. Demonstrated Need for the Use: The City's standard basis for determining need is that an applicant has identified a market for the proposed good or service. This criterion has been met in this case. With the aging of the population, this type of adult day care is needed, especially in the first-ring suburbs. 2 . 2. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan: The General Land Use Plan Map identifies the proposed site for long-term office use. Adult day care centers, by conditional use, are considered consistent with this land use designation. 3. Effect on Property Values in the Area: Approval of this CUP will not substantially alter the extent or nature of on-site development or activity. This area is isolated from residential uses and is located on a busy highway. Access is good to the area. There is a similar use (Head Start) adjacent to this use that has not had any negative affect on the area. Therefore, staff does not believe that there will be a negative effect on property values in the area. 4. Effect of any Anticipated Traffic Generation Upon Current Traffic Flow and Conaestion in the Area: Due to the nature of the proposed adult day care center, it is not anticipated that a great deal of traffic will be generated from the proposed use. Most clients would come by small buses. Only the employees would come by car. There is good Metro Transit bus service to this property. The adult day care center would be open during normal business hours. 5. Increase in Population: Because this is a non-residential use, there will be no increase in population due to the adult day care operation. The daytime population of Golden Valley would grow by the number of employees and clients. . 6. Increase in Noise Level: At this time, staff has no reason to expect that noise impacts will extend beyond the site.The only anticipated additional noises over an office building would be from small buses bringing clients. 7. Any Odor. Dust. Smoke. Gas, or Vibration Cause by the Use: This adult day care center is not expected to cause any issues regarding odor, dust, gas or vibration 8. Any Increase in Flies, Rats, or other Vermin in the Area Caused by the Use: The building will have a covered dumpster that is screened. This should eliminate any problems with animal pests. 9. Visual Appearance of the Proposed Structure of Use: The outside of this building will not change in appearance. There will be an increase to the size of the parking lot that cannot be seen from TH 55. Only the Head Start building would be affected by the parking lot expansion. 10. Other Concerns Reaardina the Use: The staff does not see any other issues to address. Recommended Action Staff recommends approval of the CUP to allow an adult day care center serving up to 90 clients at 4949 Olson Memorial Highway. The center is to be operated by Health Care Plus, Inc. This type of facility will be an asset to the City and its need for senior services. Also, this is a stand- alone day care center. The building will not be shared with other uses that may cause conflicts. The approval is subject to the following conditions: . 1. All signage must meet the requirements of the City's sign code. 3 2. The site plan prepared by Buetow and Associates and dated 9/29/03 shall become a part of this approval. . 3. The adult day care center shall be limited to 90 clients and 18 employees. 4. The hours of operation shall be 8 am to 6 pm, Monday-Saturday. 5. Up to 8 parking spaces may be "proof of parking" and striped only when it is determined it is needed to meet parking demand. The additional space freed up by the reduction of parking shall be used to improve maneuverability within the parking area. 6. The memo from Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshal, to Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development dated 9/12/03 shall become a part of this approval. 7. All improvements to the building shall meet the City's Building Code requirements. 8. The State of Minnesota Department of Human Services shall issue all necessary licenses to Health Care Plus before operating the adult day care center. Proof of licensing shall be given to the Director of Planning and Development. 9. All other applicable local, state and federal requirements shall be met. . Attachments: Location Map Letter to the Planning Commission from David Olshansky dated August 22, 2003. Plan showing parking lot layout Site Plans dated 9/29/03 Memo from Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshal, dated September 12, 2003 . 4 . 'AY55 AY55 LILAC DR N ,L-.-l , I --- I~' ~~ i) -~ J~ //~ /A~, ;;:~"'~ "- f " \ / . SCHAPER RD HIGHWAY 55 HIGHWAY 55 -~ z w ~ HIGHWAY 55 HIGHWAY HIGH Y 55 HIGHL HIGH AY 55 Un n .... 'n. _ __L_ .... \\ twl 4949 Olson.Me~ori~1 Highway 1/_ I~- '~ rn ~ // '%. ---- f<,~ ~ ~~ ~~ o LORING LN I - . . . '.. , . HEALTH CARE PLUS, INC. 2500 New Brighton Blvd (HWY88) Suite # 105 St. Anthony, MN 55418 August 22, 2003 Planning Commission City of Golden Valley Re: Building at 4949 Olson Memorial Hwy Golden Valley, MN 55422 This building will be mainly used for an Adult Day Care. This is an alternative and cost-effective services to long-term care. Studies show that day programs are very attractive and offer wonderful benefits to participants and caregivers alike. Our goal is to keep people active in the community and independent at home as well as to provide respite for the at-home caregiver spouse or child. Our center will be open Monday through Friday, Saturday if possible in the future, from 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Clients come two to five days a week, traveling cither with family members or Metro Mobility. Parking space around the building allows enough spots, based on city criterics: one spot for 5 clients and one spot for one employee. We plan to serve up to 60 clients, who will be helped by 8 employees. Also, such businesses are strictly regulated by the state statures as well. The building will have handicap accessibility, registration space, kitchen, entertainment room, restrooms, and shower room with handicap access. We also plan to provide mental health through licensed psychologists and family counseling. We will provide social and recreational services, as well as personal grooming and nursing services. Physically challenged patients benefit form assistance with activities of daily living and nursing care. Our services include but are not restricted to individualized care, respite for caregivers, dementia programming and cognitive stimulation, help with eating, walking, toileting and health monitoring (blood pressure, weight, blood sugar, medications). We provide physical therapy, speech, and music therapy. We also plan to have physician services as well. This side is located in an easily accessible and convenient location without disturbing impacts. We have no doubts this business will benefit the entire community. ~ e e e. --t---------- NE~_~AV~~~NT_ 7~.-O:._______~__t-------~~:~:-~~1~~~~~~~.-~--- -------------- ~ --~ --- .- .- .- I -- I .,- I .,- 10 ,,- I 0 I ,/'" /""-~ I .,- I / ,/ ,,~ I / 1 , ,/ to 1 /'-/ 'j. I / 1 .- I /,/.;:.. / _J / /__ _ J I / S ~......- / I / / <;;--I:.;;;,'? / I '" / I / 1(. ,,<<:; /.1 I / 8 8 I \ / I I I I '\ / I 7 I I I 'V I , I 1 1_____1 1_____' , I 0 1 N I 1 20'-0" 24'-0" 20'-0" ,..... 20'-0" 30'-6" 0 I en (/) I I AHU w 1 0 1 a.. (/) I co I 1 I f I I 1-----7 I I I I J I I J 1 / I ,/ I r---iEr " / . I _ .,- I \ / I -- r-- / ARBAGE I CU. , I I , I 0 I / 1 "- I I ,/ E CLOSUREI .... I to '" " I .... I .,- "- I .- .,- "- ...... I ..... I - "-----.19-- .....-- - - I / 34 TOTAL PARKING ST ALLS L__ EXISTING WELL WATEf u, o 1 o 0) o I en GI (J') W ~ a. (/) o .... _._-----~---_._._---_._-----------------'------------------------------------------------- 386.0" . . . Memorandum Fire Department 763-593-8055 I 763-512-2497 (fax) To: Mark Grimes, Director of Planning & Zoning From: Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshal Subject: CUP 103 Health Care Plus Memorandum Date: September 12, 2003 cc: Mark Kuhnly, Chief of Fire & Inspections Listed below are the plan review comments for the conditional use permit for the proposed Health Care Plus located at 4949 Olson Memorial Highway. 1. The proposed occupancy will require the installation of an automatic fire suppression sprinkler system. 2. The proposed occupancy will require a fire alarm notification system throughout the building. 3. The fire department vehicle access for the proposed site shall be in accordance with the Minnesota State Fire Code or provide additional fire protection safeguards as deemed necessary by the Golden Valley Fire Department. 4. A fire department lock box will be required to be installed on the building. The installation of the fire department lock box will be in accordance with the Golden Valley Fire Department's recognized standards. 5. Provide to the Golden Valley Fire Department the required document for the Minnesota Department of Health, Supervised Living Facilities as indicated in the Minnesota State Fire Code. If you have any questions, please contact me at 763-593-8065. . . . lIey Planning 763-593-8095 I 763-593-8109 (fax) Date: October 7, 2003 To: Planning Commission From: Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development Subject: Informal Public Hearing on Minor Subdivision of Lot 1, Block 1; Lot 1, Block 2; and Outlot A, Fredsall's Addition (508 Westwood Dr. S. and 4510 Strawberry Lane)-Paul and Rozalija Gannon, Applicants Description of Minor Subdivision Paul and Rozalija Gannon own Lot 1, Block 1; Lot 1, Block 2, and Outlot A in Fredsall's Addition. Their home is located on Lot 1, Block 1 (508 Westwood Dr. S.) The vacant lot is Lot 1, Block 2. When a house is built on that lot, it will be addressed as 4510 Strawberry Lane. The Gannons would now like to sell the 4510 Strawberry Lane lot to a builder for the construction of a house. However, the Gannons would like to change the property line between the lot where their house is located and the lot to the west where the new house will be constructed. This change would eliminate the 12 ft. wide Outlot A, Fredsall's Addition. (Outlot A is now a legally a part of the existing Gannon lot at 508 Westwood Dr.) The new plat would also take 10 ft. of width from existing Lot 1, Block 2 and add that to the new lot where the Gannon house is located. These changes would reduce the size of vacant Lot 1, Block 2, Fredsall's Addition from 100 ft. to 90 ft. in width along Strawberry Lane. It is my understanding that the Gannons want to make their lot wider in order to keep all the retaining walls and plantings on their lot. If the plat is approved, both new lots will exceed the minimum area requirement of 10,000 sq. ft. Qualification as a Minor Subdivision This two-lot subdivision qualifies as a minor subdivision because the properties are a part of an existing, recorded plat, create no more than four lots, and do not create the need for any additional public improvements. The applicant has submitted the required information to the City that allows for the subdivision to be evaluated as a minor subdivision. Background and History The Gannons have lived in their house at 508 Westwood Lane S. since at least 1970. The house was built in 1954 according to City records. According to the file, the Gannons added to the house in 1971 and 1986. Fredsall's Addition was approved by the City Council in 1980 although City records show that discussion about the subdivision started in 1976. As part of Fredsall's Addition, Strawberry Lane was dedicated to the City for street purposes and constructed in the early 1980's. This allowed for improved access to the area and for the construction of several new houses. The new street also improved access to a couple of existing homes that are now on Strawberry Lane. These homes previously had access to Westwood Dr. only by private driveways over easements. . Part of the Fredsall's Addition included the 12 ft. wide Outlot A between Lot 1, Block 1 and Lot 1, Block 2. Lot 1, Block 1 is owned by the Gannons as it was when the City approved the plat in 1980. The Fredsalls owned Block 1, Block 2 in 1980. Staff believes that Outlot A was also owned by the Fredsalls. After reviewing all City files, staff is not sure why Outlot A was created. However, staff does know that sometime prior to 1986, the Gannons acquired Outlot A and it was "added" to their lot. By adding Outlot A to their parcel, this allowed the Gannons to build a large addition to the west side of their house and meet the side setback requirement of 15 ft. (In 1980, the Gannons went to the BZA to obtain a variance to allow construction of an addition to within 3 ft. of the west property line. This variance was denied.) The Gannons also acquired Lot 1, Block 2 at about the same time as they acquired Outlot A. In 1971, the Gannons built an addition to the north side of their house. At that time, the Gannons received a variance for the existing front setback. When the house was built in 1954, the house was built 33 ft. from Westwood rather than the required 35 ft. This 2 ft. variance allowed for the construction of the addition in 1971. It should be noted that the preliminary plat of Gannons Addition indicates that the 1971 addition does not meet the 15 ft. side yard setback requirement. In reading the notes in the file it was assumed that the addition would be 15 ft. from the north property line. It is more like 12 ft. In 1986, a second addition was built on to the west side of the house when the Gannons acquired Outlot A. The addition met the 15 ft. side setback requirement. However, a deck was built on the front and side of the addition that do not meet the 15 ft. side yard setback requirement or 35 ft. front setback requirement. For some reason, the staff did not require a variance to allow the construction of the deck into the front and side setback area. (If the Gannon plat is approved, the deck along the west property line will exceed the 15 ft. requirement.) . As shown on the preliminary plat, there is also a 6 ft. by 6 ft. playhouse located in the northwest corner of proposed Block 2. The playhouse is located less than 2 ft. from the proposed west lot line. The Gannons would like to have the playhouse remain in that location. As a result of Gannons Addition, the existing Gannon house will be no closer to 25 ft. to the new east lot line of Lot 1, Block 1, Gannons Addition. This is an improvement over the existing 15 ft. distance to the east property line of Block 1, Lot 2, Fredsall's Addition. Because the house does not meet all setback requirements, a variance from the Subdivision Code is necessary as described below. Qualification Governing Approval as a Minor Subdivision According to Section 12.50 of the City's Subdivision Code, the following requirements must be addressed as part of a minor subdivision. Staff comment is also included: . 1. A Minor subdivision shall be denied if the proposed lots do not meet the requirements of the appropriate zoninQ district. In this case, the lot that is proposed for the existing Gannon house does not meet all requirements of the Zoning Code because the house does not meet setback requirement along the north property line (12 ft. when 15 ft. is required) and along the south property line for the existing deck (31 ft. when 35 ft. is required). A variance for the house along Westwood Drive has already been granted that makes that setback legally nonconforming. 2 . 2. A minor subdivision may be denied if the City Enoineer determines that the lots are not buildable. The City Engineer has asked for a slope stability study to determine the precautions that will have to be taken in building a house on this lot that has a 35 ft. to 40 ft. drop from the northeast to the southwest. 3. A minor subdivision may be denied if there are no sewer and water connections available or if it is determined by the City Engineer that an undue strain will be placed on the City utility systems by the addition of new lots. In this case, sewer and water lines are available to provide service to the new house and the street system is adequate handle the increased traffic from the new house. 4. Approval of the minor subdivision may require the granting of certain easements to the City. The final plat will show all necessary easements required by the City Engineer. These easements must be along all property lines. 5. If public aoencies other than the City have jurisdiction of the streets adjacent to the minor subdivision. the aoencies will be oiven the opportunity to comment. In this case, no other agencies have any jurisdiction. 6. The City may ask for review of title if required by the City Attorney due to dedication of certain easements. The City Attorney will determine if such a title review is necessary prior to approval of the final plat. . 7. The minor subdivision may be subject to park dedication requirements. In this case, the minor subdivision does not create any additional lots; therefore, a park dedication fee will not be required. Variance Criteria from the Subdivision Code As stated above, the approval of this minor subdivision will require a variance to the Subdivision Code because all requirements of the Zoning Code are not met on proposed Lot 2, Block 1, Gannons Addition. The Subdivision Code states that the Council may grant variances as long as there is finding that the following conditions are met: 1. There are special circumstances for conditions affecting said property so that the strict application of the provisions of the Subdivision Code would create an unusual hardship and deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of his land. Economic difficulty or inconvenience shall not constitute a hardship situation for the purpose of this Code. 2. The variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the petitioner. . 3. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in the neighborhood in which the property is situated. The Code states that the City shall consider the nature of the proposed use of the land, the existing use of the land in the vicinity, and the number of people who will reside in the subdivision, and how traffic conditions will be affected by the additional development in the subdivision. The City may prescribe conditions to the variance. The Planning Commission is expected to make a recommendation on the variance request. 3 . . . Recommended Action The staff recommends approval of the preliminary sketch of Gannons Addition and the variances needed to permit the subdivision to go forward to the City Council. It is in the best interest of the City to see an additional house on Strawberry Lane and this subdivision redraws property lines to make the lot for the existing Gannon house wider to accommodate their large house. The following conditions are recommended: 1. The preliminary plat of Gannons Addition dated September 25, 2003 and prepared by Schoell and Madson, Inc. shall become a part of this approval. 2. The City Attorney will determine if a title review is needed prior to approval of the final plat by the City Council. 3. Drainage and utility easements as required by the Subdivision Code shall be show on the final plat. Attachments: Location Map Preliminary Plat of Gannons Addition Preliminary Drawings for New House at 4510 Strawberry Lane 4 . , i I I I I ,I i1 'I l I .: .. " ar ._J\; Bl '-ji \ B1 l \.( 4- I "'ID \; .-r= ~ 8J 1\' fi.. ~ Be r V A::: wO. ~'II 8J l ' .-(b -::: T -SF' t'- ~ ~"', ", 1!! 8J. I ;~ ", ~f, B. tv: ,/A ~ Brf'~ ~~ ~ ~:::~~ _ r. ~ 'mlr1 ~,r~ I~~, L'~ 10 ~ ,~. ., :w ~ i ~_:-~-'--1' " ' !- jJ A. Q 1-'. i~ ~ i III~~ ~ ~ I' ~~ ~ 4$ - I " .. ._- ....~..,... '- I . ...- . . .- ""'I'~ lEB- -....".. ~ \\ ~ : 'JiY.~ IJ iiIIilll'" ; ~ ~ I l-,<,/ "'''c. I . (FI:J:-I:f :1m ~ ~. .1 ~ T \ .\ '( -.frI - !' \ ~ ( . III Ii II II II . III : II I II lilT II .. i IIf' 'II! II 1- I / )~'I' 1 .' \ . ~" !~ r .::~. ~ ~:~ b' 1;::;: , ( . ~ / ~ ..: I .' .~ '-T' ! I '1\" l:-If . I"H.J ~L - - 9 -..-/' "~~ r ~ :f 'It ~ ~~ ( ~. i.1 ~, I ~~, I I ~ $~~ ~ " 0 ~rrr :?r .1 (W; cJ ~ w ."" ._9~' , J C{' j.5. ~ ... : '("i .J. ,) -J. ...; ,.l, II~J-I~ /I 'J-.'i. , ujl,-z.. , '/~J~L z-, J II \ Q/~8 ~hJ) b . e .- . . , .. :l . : ~: , \. .. (; .. ~ .. ~ .. a 4i .. . : I I ~tti~ ~~~,] ~8~~ , , I ~ I ' :!~ , ~~ , lZ.. :'-...J ~tr ,\,~2 ~' ~~ , ~ LJl .~ ) ~'kJ , ~~ , 11 ~~ ~ ~;' N I. \ . . . Hey raa Planning 763-593-8095 I 763-593-8109 (fax) Date: October 9, 2003 To: Planning. Commission From: Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development Subject: Informal Public Hearing on Conditional Use Permit to Allow Up to 3000 Sq. Ft. of the 1200 Mendelssohn Ave. Building for Accessory Retail Sales Incidental to the Hope for the City Warehouse-J. Brian Woolsey, Hope for the City Executive VP, Applicant Background and Description of Proposal On September 11, 2003, the Zoning Code change allowing accessory retail sales and/or services in the Light Industrial and Industrial zoning districts went into effect. This change to City Code allows up to 10% of a building footprint for accessory retail sales and/or services as long as the sales and/or services are incidental to a permitted use within the building. A Conditional Use Permit would also be required. The City now has its first application to allow accessory retail sales in the Industrial zoning district. Not surprisingly, the first applicant is Hope for the City. They requested the change to the Zoning Code because they are leasing space at 1200 Mendelssohn Ave. N. and would like to use it primarily for warehouse space with up to 3000 sq. ft. for an outlet store. Hope for the City will be leasing 12,000 sq. ft. at the 1200 Mendelssohn Ave. building. (The building is located at the southeast corner of Mendelssohn Ave. and Plymouth Ave.) The space is located on the south side of the building with access off Mendelssohn Ave. As part of their application, they have submitted a narrative description of their not-for-profit organization. In addition to the warehouse portion of the business that employs 2-3 persons, they would like to operate a small store in order to sell excess inventories of general household good. There would be no additional employees for the store operation. The proceeds from the sales would go to help run Hope for the City. As indicated in the narrative; the store would operate only on Thursday, Friday and Saturday from 10 am to 6 pm. They anticipate 20 to 35 customer per day that means about 70 vehicle trips. Mr. Woolsey, Executive VP for Hope for the City, has indicated to me that no more than 3,000 sq. ft. of their total 12,000 sq. ft. would be used for the store. The plan for their space indicates the location of the retail store. The footprint of the 1200 Mendelssohn building is approximately 40,000 sq. ft. so the amount for the retail store proposed by Hope for the City is less than 10% of the building footprint. Existing Building The applicant has submitted several plan sheets indicating the existing site plan, a plan showing the space to be used by Hope for the City, a plan indicating the existing tenants in the building . . . and a plan showing maximum parking on the site. The building is a 2 story brick and block office/warehouse building with approximately 51,000 sq. ft. of leaseable space on two levels. The building was constructed in 1959 as a paint factory. There are currently 12 tenants in the building (including Hope for the City). There are several spaces that are for lease on the second floor. The uses in the building are a mix of warehouse space, showroom space, manufacturing and office space. There is also the Rico Kickboxing Club on the Plymouth Ave. side that has operated since 2000 without any issues. Welsh Companies in Bloomington is both the owner of the building and the leasing agent. The City has had an ongoing code compliance concern with one of the tenants in the building regarding the storage of automobiles. Approximately 5-6 older cars have been parked at the southwest corner of the site along the railroad tracks. An auto leasing and sales company owns these cars. They are allowed to have 5 spaces for the parking of cars. No sales may occur on the site. The cars must each have a current license or else they are considered junk cars and may be towed. At this time, Welsh is dealing with this tenant and Welsh will not be renewing their lease in February 2004. Welsh Companies has told me that they will speak to the tenant about this car storage problem. The City will also continue to monitor this matter and use its police powers to bring the situation into conformity. Parking The parking requirement for 12,000 sq. ft. space leased by Hope for the City is 24 spaces if the space is used solely for warehouse purposes. If 3,000 sq. ft. is used for a store and 9,000 sq. ft. for warehouse, the parking requirement is 38. (This number is based on one space for each 150 sq. ft. of retail space and one space for each 500 sq. ft. of warehouse space.) If the other 39,000 sq. ft. of space in the building is 80% warehouse and 20% office, the parking requirement for that portion of the building is 70 spaces. Therefore, the total parking required for the entire building is about 108 spaces. Welsh has submitted a proof of parking plan for their property that indicates that there is space for 134 spaces on the site. (Ignore the property line on this proof of parking plan because it is incorrect. Welsh does have the right to park on the spaces indicated on the plan because they either own the land or have a permanent easement for parking and access.) The existing site plan map actually indicates where the parking spaces are striped. Only about 75 spaces are actually striped. I have been to the site numerous times and have never seen a parking shortage with the 75 spaces. Even with the addition of the Hope for the City operation, parking should be adequate on the site. As part of the CUP, staff will require that there is a proof of parking condition in the CUP. This would state that additional parking would have to be added to the site up to the 134 spaces if the number of striped parking spaces were not adequate. The Hope for the City portion of the building will be accessed from the west and south side of the building. The warehouse portion will have two or three dock doors along the south side that will allow truck access. The store will be accessed through a pedestrian door on the west side of the building. It is hoped that store customers will use the parking spaces along the west property line along Mendelssohn Ave. Those coming to pick up items in the warehouse come on an appointment basis and usually come in the truck that will pick up the items. Therefore, the non- store portion of Hope for the City requires few car parking spaces. Setback/Code Issues. The subject property is zoned Industrial and the General Land Use Plan designates the area for Industrial uses. The property is bordered on the west by TH 169, on the north by a single-family residential area, on the east by light industrial and on the south by railroad right-of-way and the city-owned storage facility. 2 . . . The existing building itself meets setback requirements. The parking lots on the north, west and south side do not meet setback requirements, and are, therefore, considered non-conforming. However, according to City Code Section 11.90, Subd. 2, relating to non-conforming uses, this is not an issue since the building footprint is not proposed to be changed. Environmental Issues Since the building footprint is not being changed and no changes are being proposed to alter the landscape, the applicant is not required to submit plans to the Public Works Department regarding grading, erosion control, drainage or tree preservation. The Department of Public Works has chosen not to comment on this CUP application because it is an existing use and the site will not change. The Fire Marshall has written a memo and his findings will be made a part of the CUP. Factors for Consideration 1. Demonstrated Need for the Use: The City's standard basis for determination of need is that an applicant has identified a market for the proposed good or service. 2. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan: The General Land Use Plan identifies the proposed site for industrial uses. Because only a small portion of the 1200 Mendelssohn Building will be used for incidental retail sales, the area will remain industrial/office/service in nature. 3. Effect on Property Values in the Area: Approval of the CUP will not substantially alter the extent or nature on on-site development or activity. The store is proposed to be located on the south side of the building, away from the single- family area to the north. Also, the number of customers that is anticipated to use the store is expected to be small and limited to only three days a week. 4. Effect on Any Anticipated Traffic Generation Upon Current Traffic Flow and ConQestion in the Area: The applicant has stated that the store will generate about 35 customers on the three days per week when it is open. This translates into about 70 total trips. The number of employees will be the same with or without the store since the warehouse employees will operate the store. This building is in a very accessible area due to its proximity to TH 169 and Plymouth Ave. 5. Effect on Any Increase in Population: Staff does no believe that the number of employees or customers will increase the daytime population in a manner that would have a negative impact on the surrounding area. 6. Increase in Noise Level: The store is relatively small and would not cause any noise issues. The store is on the south side of building that is in close proximity to TH 169 that creates a significant amount of background noise. 7. Any Odor. Dust. Smoke. Gas. or Vibration Caused by the Use: Because of the nature of the business, staff does not suspect the store will cause these problems. 8. Any Increase in Flies. Rats. or other Vermin in the Area Caused by the Use: These types of pests will not increase due to the store. There will be a covered dumpster that will be used to toss any unwanted items. 3 . . . 9. Other Concerns ReQardinQ the Use: The applicant is not proposing any outside storage or changes to the outside appearance of the building, other than signage. All signage will have to meet the requirements of the Sign Code. Recommended Action Staff recommends approval of a CUP that would allow Hope for the City to operate a retail store incidental to their permitted use. The store would take up no more than 3,000 sq. ft. within the 12,000 sq. ft. that is leased at 1200 Mendelssohn Ave. N. The proposed store with its limited operating hours, two employees and limited number of customers will not have a negative impact on the building or area. Also, there appears to be more than adequate parking on the site for all the uses within the building. The following conditions are recommended: 1. A retail store incidental to the Hope for the City warehouse may operate in no more than 3,000 sq. ft. of the 12,000 sq. ft. leased by Hope for the City. The attached Hope for the City floor space plan indicates the location of the store. 2. If additional parking is needed, the owner of the 1200 Mendelssohn building will stripe additional parking spaces as shown on the Proof of Parking Plan. The Director of Planning and Development will determine if additional striped parking is needed. 3. The retail store hours shall be 10 am to 6 pm on Thursday, Friday and Saturday. 4. All signage for the Hope for the City operation shall meet the requirements of the sign code. 5. The memo from Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshal to Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Date October 2, 2003 shall become a part of this approval. 6. All other applicable local, state, and federal requirements shall be met. Attachments: . Location map . Applicant's Narrative · Memo from Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshal to Mark Grimes, Director of Planning Dated October2, 2003 · Exterior Site Plan/Proof of Parking for 1200 Mendelssohn · Hope for the City floor space plan · 1200 Mendelssohn Ave. current site plan · 1200 Mendelssohn Building floor layouts 4 1200 Mendelssohn Ave. ~ . z w ~ w o z W Q Z W a. w Q :?: ~ <-f, z :z: o II) II) ..J W Q Z w == NPL YMOUTH AVE N . :z: C5 :z: :E ~ ..... :I: 0'1 C5 CQ Z :I: :E ~ ..... 0'1 CQ Z . :z: r= ,.. II) lJl o ~ ~ m z G) m a lJl c: ~ ~ m z PLYMOUTH AVE N . . . NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION Hope for the citv is a 5 year old 501c3 (not for profit) organization. Developed to be the procuring Idistribution agent of new merchandise ie, clothing , household goods, office- school supplies. Sourced from local and national manufactures & wholesalers, freely received these goods, are then freely given. Distributed to over 65 local community partners (501c3), this distribution of free goods has taken place for over 3 years. Facilitated by one fulltime employ, and supported by up to 20 volunteers. Each Friday of the week between 12:00 & 2:00 PM. Organizations receiving free goods attendance varies from 15 to 25 partners per distribution contingent upon quantities on hand. Stocking of this secured merchandise for Friday distributions takes place Monday through Thursday between 10:00 & 3:00 on average this can represent 3 to 5 trucks delivering goods per week. In conjunction with our present operation we are requesting a conditional use permit, allowing hope for the city to sell small excess inventory's of general household goods, with proceeds going to the foundation. Sales could be accomplished In a retail space not to exceed 10% of the existing footprint of the building. This operation could potentially run on a Thursday Friday Saturday weekly schedule with hours of 10:00 to' 6:00 PM which is projected to develop 20 to 35 customer trips per day. . . . ~ J:) " ~ It){' ~ ~ ~ () 0' l',jOJJ-h. ~ .1 ~ ",c. k.:::- ;)-0 ~ e i2 +- ~ [nJ'\ ~ " " I n__~ '" . 1____ J '\ ~ "$::) "'-\.{) '\ ,'\ '\ '\ \r.~".. '\ '\ " 0 \(' " \ '\ '\ '\"'" "- - \ "'-\ \ . ,,~ -\ - ~ - \ '" "- 0- - o I i -~l , I ______...J I -j ______...J c.o~ .~ . . -----.., .- - ,-- E~ t\V"54- 'f l ~ - [).. 00 MLo/l. ~\..s:.S D k V"'. - lQ.~~ t-- ~ VV\. W\ \.<:e..t- ~ cd.t-> ('2,oLfO JJ) vV\'1V\ ...,{p.e..J-L-.-'e> r2rzF. '6, , \ A is L A..o1-" L e<<;"^J <?~ I $.f) A v fv W'o\': k l. "''''; '^ 'J- A,..rl-D ~0Jh (<'1'11 st) A\!.k~o.j,:Lc .\~t.-~ \ MW\ \,( F,' VIA ((IS SJ-) LOlbOv "f.)(QLV-+~V'-€. ~ so;, tfUJ!ICi,-m.J) P";-:-+:"d H o-ee ..fL+kC~ (A ff l:u"",\-)~,I(:ll' ~J) PVDfoJed LJ~e 'J,."" s z ( &vt c9-- n tnTl.- - P 00 tf'\.J VIA I s. So h '1 . --r,., -reV\~ Vs.e --- R v 1M- 't,l.Q.. ~ 01 (':1, 5"7 B ~. ) r, I I / /' I, r , . 6 rl -rvu ~~ ... K..\ (.. L< -po x'd B,ctku k"J;d-~':>-oos,) ~Vi"+0~Qf[.,1 ~ ( ~lve: ~1110pd~1e>l;>',0~~..f) fV1wnvl",-kv<v~ ~'f' '-r M VI v ~ "do j\-e C" V\M Ct 0,003 sl)(q W\ &""\ i&. f e>.; v <' bwtbioiA} 'A>>vc;,,/.eS 'l"'\c-v(\v~l-vvLv< A(, ~ ' ~'H3 sJ-) ( 0 d--e- '- -- -- ~ - .- . ,~ \ Q I :::I c:::ll , A v...:tq..\,lJ.. . c c c c c c c A v ",~l ,,\k . . . Public Jl~y Memorandum Fire Department 763-593-8055 I 763-512-2497 (fax) To: Mark Grimes, Director of Planning & Zoning From: Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshal Subject: Memorandum - CUP -1 04-Hope for the City Date: October 2, 2003 cc: Mark Kuhnly, Fire Chief Listed below are the fire department plan review comments for the proposed conditional use permit 104, for the proposed occupancy of Hope for the City at 1200 Mendelssohn Avenue. 1. The proposed retail and warehouse area shall be in compliance with the Minnesota State Fire Code. 2. The storage of products in the warehouse area shall be in accordance with the Minnesota State Fire Code, Chapter 23 - High Pile Combustible Storage. If you have any questions, please call me at 763-593-8065. .. e EXTERIOR SITE PLAN + Proof eF ark,,,,) /J. ()[) tvJcN]cLssokJJ A\fb _._..c;.-'--C'--'C'-U--'-C:--'u--'~'--'--'--'--'--~., , ~ , /, ~I I 1.:"'\ \et 11. &I \...q d , ! ....... ... .-------- I ~ ~ /' Ci , i o! , , ~ Oi , ~-_.__.- .--.--.--.--.--.--.--.---.--.--.--.--.- .--.--.--.-:-.--.--.--eJ - ~ ,5. . II II II . II II II . II II II I I ~ . a II II r'i """, Ie i . a II II vJ (J. '-' . ~ I , . II II (':, i """! . II II 0 C ~ ~ c ..s:-' "" -~