Loading...
022712 PacketJ Introducto Roll Call PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA February 27, 2012 Proceedings 7:00 p.m. Approval of Minutes: Regular Planning Commission minutes of January 23, 2012. Opportunity for Citizens to Address the Commission on items not on the Agenda Public Hearing ITEM #1 12-ACUP-01 Amend conditional use permit for 6315 Penn Avenue, dog kennel outdoor relief area New Business ITEM #2 PC Letter #2 Discuss Upcoming Study Session Schedule ITEM #3 PC Letter #3 Approval of Planning Commission Bylaws ITEM #4 PC Letter #4 Election of Chairperson, Vice -Chairperson & Secretary ITEM #5 PC Letter #5 Appointment of liaisons to the Community Services Advisory Commission, City Council, Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA), School Board and Transportation Committee Old Business Liaison Resorts Community Services Advisory Commission City Council Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) Richfield School Board Transportation Commission Chamber of Commerce Other City Planner's Report Next Meeting Date: 2/28/12 - Joint CC/HRA/PC worksession Adjournment "Auxiliary aid for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. Requests must be made at least 96 hours in advance to the City Clerk at 612/861-9738". Planning Commission • Minutes January 23, 2012 MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Rick Jabs, Commissioners Robert Hall, Dan Kitzberger, Josh Root, Tom Rublein, Maureen Scaglia, Dennis Schuller and Gordon Vizecky MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Melissa Poehlman, City Planner Karen Barton, Assistant Community Development Director OTHERS PRESENT: None Chair Jabs called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES M/Hall, S/Rublein to approve the minutes of the November 28, 2011 study session and regular meeting. Motion carried: 8-0 OPEN FORUM No members of the public spoke. PUBLIC HEARING(S) ITEM #1 Case No. 12-CUP-02 — Conduct a public hearing and consider a request for a conditional use permit for a full -service restaurant — 800 66t" Street West (Pizza Luce) City Planner Melissa Poehlman (Poehlman) presented the staff report stating that staff had found all of the general criteria necessary to issue the requested permit to be met. Staff recommended that approval be conditioned upon final approval of a revised landscape plan, a final lighting plan and revised site plan that includes pedestrian connections to the adjacent sidewalk. January 23, 2012 Ms. JJ Haywood, Pizza Luce CEO, stated that they were excited to move forward and expand into Richfield. In response to a question from Commissioner Vizecky, Ms. Haywood stated that they did not take issue with the recommendation of City staff for refinements of their plans. In response questions from Commissioner Hall, Ms. Haywood and architect Nathaniel Shea described their business model, discussed the selection of boulevard trees and stated that the Post Office would be looking at alternative parking solutions if the Pizza Luce permit is granted. In response to questions from Commissioner Rublein, Ms. Haywood stated that music and noise levels on the patio would comply with City Code requirements and that as a company, liquor service is taken very seriously. Mr. Shea identified the building addition on the plans in response to a question from Dawn ? (speaker did not sign in). In response to questions from Ms. Serena Tsui, 6500 Woodlake Drive #811, Ms. Haywood indicated that while tree selection had not been finalized, Pizza Luce would maintain all of their landscaping and that the restaurant would have 140-150 seats. Friday evening is the busiest period of time. In response to a question from Commissioner Hall, Ms. Haywood stated that the hours of operation would be 11 a.m. until 2 a.m. with the patio closing down at 10:00 p.m. M/Vizecky, S/Root to close the public hearing. Motion carried. 8-0 Commissioner Vizecky and Chair Jabs indicated that they were pleased to welcome a new restaurant to the City at this site. M/Vizecky, S/Scaglia to recommend approval of a conditional use permit for a full - service restaurant at 800 66t" Street West. Motion carried. 8-0 ITEM #2 Case No. 11-SP-01, 11-VAR-01 — Conduct a public hearing and consider a request for construction of a new retail auto parts store (O'Reilly Auto Parts) at 1120 66tn Street East. Consider a request for variances to allow the proposed development to exceed the maximum front setback requirement, reduce interior side and rear setbacks along the western and northern property lines, reduce the required sidewalk width, reduce the required parking stall width and to reduce irrigation requirements. Poehlman presented the staff report, highlighting the criteria necessary for granting a variance and the specifics of each request by the applicant. Based on these criteria, January 23, 2012 staff recommended that the variance request related to irrigation be granted; that modified versions of the variance requests related to front and side setbacks be granted; and that variance requests related to parking lot setbacks, pedestrian walkways and parking stalls be denied. Ms. Jann Owen, 6535 11t" Avenue distributed materials and presented an alternative site plan that would position the parking lot nearer to her property rather than the building. Mr. Mark Wold of O'Reilly Automotive (O'Reilly) addressed staff's recommendation stating that O'Reilly would comply with the requests to reduce the drive aisle to 24 feet and to increase the width of the pedestrian walkway to 6 feet. Mr. Wold suggested that the trees along the northern property line may not be healthy and recommended that the City Forester examine them. Chair Jabs asked Mr. Wold if O'Reilly had made an attempt to address the 66t" Street Corridor Plan. Mr. Wold responded that O'Reilly was not aware of the proposal and would not have pursued this site had they been. Mr. Wold indicated that the Richfield Chamber of Commerce contacted O'Reilly Automotive and asked that they pursue development at the site. He further indicated that the site plan presented by Ms. Owen would not work for delivery vehicles. In response to a question from Chair Jabs, Mr. Wold indicated that they had conducted a market study. Commissioner Schuller asked if O'Reilly had considered purchasing the homes at 6535 11t" Avenue (Jann Owen's property) and 6524 12t" Avenue (Holman property). Mr. Wold stated that they had not. He stated that he had met with Ms. Jan Holman previously and hoped that the proposed plan addressed all of her concerns. In response to a question from Commissioner Rublein, Poehlman stated that estimates from aerial photography indicated that the previous restaurant building had been located approximately 17 feet from the western property line (adjacent to Jann Owen's property). In response to a question from Commissioner Hall, Mr. Wold stated that Ms. Owen's proposal would not work for the O'Reilly delivery trucks. Commissioner Rublein stated that Ms. Owen's proposal would perhaps not be desirable for the neighbor to the north (Ms. Holman). Ms. Owen stated that she would much prefer parking to be close to her property rather than the building specifically with the elevation change between her property and the site. January 23, 2012 Ms. Janet Holman, 6524 12th Ave, stated that she would prefer the proposed plan because it maintains the existing line of trees and fence. She does however support her neighbor and does not want to negatively impact her property. Mr. Darryl Jorgenson, owner representative of 1120 66th Street, stated that the existing trees and fence already shade the rear corner of Ms. Owen's lot and the proposal will not change that. Mr. Jorgenson stated the Richfield Chamber of Commerce supports the proposal. M/Root, SNizecky to close the public hearing. Motion carried: 8-0 Questions about the existing fence were answered. Commissioner Root stated that during the 66th Street planning process, residents had strong feelings about what should be in this corridor and the Commission should be mindful of what participants said. In response to a question from Commissioner Rublein, Mr. Wold indicated that time was not critical, but that O'Reilly would like to build this summer. Chair Jabs stated that he valued O'Reilly as a part of the community, but that this proposal does not fit anything identified as important in the 66th Street Corridor Plan. This site will set a precedent for future development along 66th Street. Commissioner Rublein stated that the Penn Avenue Design Guidelines were immediately ignored as well. Commissioner Scaglia said that in her mind the consensus at the 66th Street planning meetings was that something should go here and that it shouldn't be a restaurant. Commissioner Hall asked what the concern about parking in the rear would be and if it could be alleviated by designating that parking as "employee only." Ms. Holman responded that the removal of the trees and the proximity of the parking lot and accompanying noise was an issue for her. The Commissioners discussed the timing of the application submittal and the 66th Street Corridor Study. Chair Jabs stated that he would like to see more work done on the site plan. Mr. Wold responded that O'Reilly would not approve parking in the back of the building. Commissioner Hall questioned whether or not there was a middle ground that could satisfy both neighbors. Ms. Owen stated that the existing Bloomington store has parking in the rear. January 23, 2012 MNizecky, S/Scaglia to recommend approval of the proposed resolution granting site plan approval and variances for construction of a retail store at 1120 66t" Street. Chair Jabs said that he was not ready to approve the proposal and believed that it would be a disservice to those who had participated in the 66t" Street study to move forward as proposed. Commissioner Rublein asked that if approved, O'Reilly be diligent about preventing the servicing of cars in the parking lot. Commissioner Root stated that he would like to see an O'Reilly store here, however, this configuration could be changed and he is confident that O'Reilly delivery trucks could manage an alternative design. Commissioner Vizecky indicated his belief that voting no on this proposal sent the wrong message to developers. Commissioner Rublein felt that a delay of action could potentially produce a solution that would be better for all. M/Hall to table consideration of this item. Chair Jabs stated that there was a motion on the floor. Commissioner Rublein stated that the previous motion could be withdrawn. Commissioners Vizecky and Scaglia declined to do so. Motion carried: 5-3 (Jabs, Root, Schuller dissenting) ITEM #3 Case No. 12-CUP-01, 12-VAR-01— Conduct a public hearing and consider a request for a conditional use permit and variances to allow an animal kennel with an outdoor relief area at 6315 Penn Avenue. Poehlman presented the staff report, highlighting the criteria necessary for granting a variance and the specifics of each request by the applicant. Staff indicated that they had received one call from a resident who was somewhat concerned about barking, but thought that location of the outdoor relief area in the front yard could address that issue. Staff also received a call from Ms. Sarah Wolf Foss, 6241 Oliver Avenue who stated that she vehemently opposed the proposal. Ms. Foss indicated that she is scared of dogs and believes that dog owners are not responsible. She is scared that dogs will get loose and wanted to make it clear to the operators that she would sue them if that happened. Ms. Foss stated that airport property would be a more appropriate location for this business. January 23, 2012 In response to a question from Commissioner Rublein staff stated that the settlement agreement that the City had reached with the owner of 6315 Penn Avenue had no bearing on this request. Applicants Don and Lori Swetala addressed the Commission, stating that the brick construction of the building would limit any noise and that the outdoor relief area would be supervised at all times. They had considered an outdoor relief area behind the building, but agreed with staff's recommendation to move to the front to increase the distance between the dogs and the daycare playground. Dog activities would largely take place in the basement, also serving to limit noise. Mr. and Mrs. Swetala also discussed "pack management" and the limited amount of barking that occurs in a properly managed facility. In response to Ms. Wolf Foss' concerns, the facility is to be an indoor and urban center. Dogs will be required to be leashed while being brought in from vehicles. The proximity to Penn Avenue makes this very important as well. Michelle Moin, representing Mother Duck Daycare at 6301 Penn Avenue, stated that she was not opposed to the proposal, but wanted assurance that all drop-off of dogs would take place in the front rather than in the alley. Long-term, Ms. Moin stated that parking is an issue in this area and she hopes the City will address this through making it easier to cross Penn Avenue. Ms. Moin is concerned about odors related to dog waste and the proximity of the existing trash enclosure to the daycare's playground. Ms. Swetala stated that they were looking at many alternatives for disposal and that they do not plan to use the dumpster, but rather a standard trash can. Ms. Swetala and Ms. Moin discussed the behavior of dogs and the possibility for them to behave unpredictably. In response to questions from Commissioner Kitzberger, Mr. & Mrs. Swetala indicated that they hoped to serve approximately 20-25 dogs to start and that dogs would not be leashed in the outdoor relief area, but that it would be completely enclosed and supervised at all times. In response to a question from Ms. Moin, Mr. & Mrs. Swetala indicated that they had planned to offer dog -walking as a service, but would listen to neighbor concerns about that. They had also considered "field trips" with the dogs to nearby dog parks. In response to a question, Poehlman stated that there are no City Ordinances related to the number of dogs a person can walk at one time. If there were dogs that were not under control, a resident could call Public Safety. In response to a question from Commissioner Rublein, Mr. Swetala indicated that they would have waste picked up as often as necessary and that they had discussed this issue with waste haulers. M/Root, SNizecky to close the public hearing. Commissioner Rublein asked if the resolution could include prohibit dog -walking for the time being. January 23, 2012 Poehlman recommended against this as it would require the applicants to then come back and apply for an amendment to the permit. Perhaps an amendment to require that the applicant discuss the issue with Public Safety prior to offering the service would suffice. M/Root, S/Vizecky to recommend approval of a resolution granting approval of a conditional use permit and variances at 6315 Penn Avenue. Commissioner Rublein proposed a friendly amendment to include a provision related to dog -walking. Commissioners Root and Vizecky declined to amend. Motion carried. 7-1 (Rublein dissenting) NEW BUSINESS None OLD BUSINESS None LIAISON REPORTS Community Services Advisory Commission: No report City Council: No report HRA: Report by Commissioner Rublein Richfield School Board: Report by Commissioner Kitzberger Transportation Commission: No report Chamber of Commerce: Report by Commissioner Vizecky Other: Commissioner Schuller ADJOURNMENT M/Root, S/Vizecky to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried. 8-0 The meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 9:31 p.m. Robert Hall Secretary OAGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # CASE # PUBLIC HEARING 12-ACUP-01 ..■iM PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT PC MEETING DATE: FEBRUARY 27, 2012 ITEM FOR PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION: Public hearing to consider a request for an amendment to a Conditional Use Permit which would allow an accessory outdoor dog relief area at 6315 Penn Avenue. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Conduct and close a public hearing and by motion: Recommend approval of an amended Conditional Use Permit for an accessory outdoor doq relief area at 6315 Penn Avenue. II. BACKGROUND In September of 2011, the Council approved an ordinance change that would conditionally permit animal kennels and outdoor relief areas in the Mixed Use — Community (MU-C) District. On February 14t", the Council granted approval of a Conditional Use Permit for a kennel at 6315 Penn Avenue. Applicants Don and Lori Swetala had intended to request approval of an outdoor relief area at the same time, but negotiations with the property owner and neighbors delayed that portion of the application. Mr. & Mrs. Swetala are now applying for an amendment to the permit that would allow them to construct an outdoor relief area behind the building and move two employee parking stalls to the unused loading dock area. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY Outdoor relief areas are conditionally permitted in the MU-C District so long as the following conditions are met: a) The outdoor relief area shall not be located in the front yard. This requirement is met. b) The outdoor relief area must meet setback requirements. This requirement is met. All aspects of the relief area are a minimum of five feet from lot lines. c) The outdoor relief area shall be screened from view of neighboring properties as approved by the City. This requirement is met. The relief area will be surrounded by a six-foot black chain link fence with black privacy slats. d) The outdoor relief area shall be for the use of dogs only. This requirement is met. The facility will be for dogs only. e) No dogs shall remain unattended in the outdoor relief area. The applicant is aware of this requirement. f) The outdoor relief area shall not be used as an outdoor kennel, animal run, animal play area or any other use not specifically identified in the conditional use permit. The applicant is aware of this requirement. g) The outdoor relief area shall be maintained in a clean and sanitary condition at all times. The applicants have proposed the following plan for meeting this requirement: ■ The asphalt in the main relief area will be excavated to enhance drainage and contain any relief byproducts. The newly poured cement in the existing garbage area will be preserved as well as the asphalt at the top of the entrance/exit where the dogs will enter the relief area. These areas will only be used to funnel traffic in and out of the building and not for relief purposes. In the excavated relief area, a layer of Class 5 Pack or sand can be layered over the open dirt to absorb liquid if necessary. On top will be a 6" to 10" layer of pea gravel or 3/8" river rock. This will allow dissipation and evaporation of any urine and will be easiest to keep clean with biodegradable products and spray water. All fecal material will be immediately removed and contained in a bag. There will be a regular schedule of maintenance of this relief area and it will be kept clean and sprayed. Because drainage will be adequate for the level of activity, combined with evaporation, immediate fecal removal and the addition of biodegradable products to keep the area clean, odor is not expected to be a problem. • APPLICANT NOTE: Research has shown most dog daycare facilities utilize natural grass only in their relief areas. Drainage & smell do not prove to be a problem. Additionally, most airports that offer outdoor pet relief areas use pea gravel because of the ease of keeping it clean which reduces odor. ■ The solid waste will be double bagged and left in a container in the existing garbage enclosure in the back of the building. The waste will be picked up once weekly. If odor becomes a problem, Woof Central will increase pick up service to 2x per week or move the waste container inside the building. • APPLICANT NOTE: Lucky Dog in Bloomington has waste disposal service once every two weeks. h) Solid waste material shall be removed a minimum of once per day and disposed of in a sanitary manner. Solid dog waste will be removed immediately and disposed of in garbage as described above. i) If required by the Public Works Department, a filtration bed shall be constructed to ensure that liquid waste will not enter into the ground or the City's storm water system. The Public Works Department has not requested this treatment. In order to grant a conditional use permit, the Council must find that all of the following conditions will be met: a) The proposed use is consistent with the goals, policies and objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan. This requirement is met. The Penn Avenue Corridor is intended to be a traditional, vibrant, pedestrian -oriented district. Attractive design and additional landscaping could significantly enhance the street presence of this property. b) The proposed use is consistent with the purposes of the Zoning Code and the purposes of the zoning district in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use. This requirement is met. The Mixed Use - Community District and Penn Avenue Corridor Overlay District are intended to provide space for a wide variety of retail and service businesses. c) The proposed use is consistent with any officially adopted redevelopment plans or urban design guidelines. Given the limited parking at this site, providing the parking treatment contemplated by the Penn Avenue Design Guidelines would be extremely difficult. The applicants have proposed attractive additions to the building fagade and small landscape area in front of the building. Additionally staff recommends that large planters be installed along the southern property line, adjacent to the proposed employee parking stalls, in attempt to provide something in the "amenity zone" (area between parking lot and sidewalk) discussed in the Design Guidelines. The 14-foot width of the loading dock area provides enough room to do so without impacting parking. d) The proposed use is or will be in compliance with the performance standards specified in Section 544 of this Code. This requirement is met. The required parking (10 spaces) for this use is provided. Additionally, the applicants have an agreement with the owners of Lariat Lanes to provide additional employee parking if needed. Subsection 509.25 governs site improvements for nonconforming sites. In instances where the requirements of Section 544 cannot be met, alternative landscaping and screening plans can be approved. Staff is confident that the applicants can come to an agreement with Assistant Director Barton regarding final plans to enhance the property. e) The proposed use will not have undue adverse impacts on government facilities, utilities, services or existing or proposed improvements. This requirement is met. The submitted plans have been reviewed by the Public Works Department and no undue adverse impacts are anticipated. t) The use will not have undue adverse impacts on the public health, safety or welfare. Staff believes that the proposal will mitigate any potentially negative impacts. As is the case with any business, City nuisance regulations are applicable. If the business is found to be in violation of these regulations or the regulations of this permit the City can take action through the court system or through revocation of the Conditional Use Permit. g) There is a public need for such use at the proposed location. This requirement is met. The rehabilitation/re-use of vacant buildings is an integral part of enhancing the Penn Avenue Corridor. h) The proposed use meets or will meet all the specific conditions set by this Code for the granting of such conditional use permit. This requirement is met. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • The applicants have received approval to open their business. The requested amendment applies only to the outdoor relief area. C. FINANCIAL • The required processing fee has been paid. D. LEGAL Zoning: Mixed Use — Community with Penn Avenue Corridor Overlay Land Use: Current: Approved for animal kennel Proposed: Animal kennel with outdoor relief area Comprehensive Plan: Mixed Use Notification: Properties within 350-feet Other Actions: Council: City Council consideration March 13, 2012 H RA: N/A Hearing Examiner: N/A IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • Recommend approval of the proposal with modifications. • Recommend denial with a finding that the proposed use would have an adverse impact on surrounding properties or the City as a whole. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution • Proposed plans • Planning & zoning maps VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • Don & Lori Swetala, applicants RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION GRANTING APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AT 6315 PENN AVENUE WHEREAS, an application has been filed with the City of Richfield which requests approval of an amendment to a conditional use permit to permit an accessory outdoor animal relief area on the parcel of land located at 6315 Penn Avenue (the "Property"), legally described as: Lots 20 and 21, Block 12, Ray's Lynnhurst, Hennepin County, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Richfield recommended approval of this requested amendment to the conditional use permit at their February 27, 2012 meeting; and WHEREAS, the requested amendment meets the requirements necessary for issuing a conditional use permit as specified in Richfield's Zoning Code, Section 547.09; and WHEREAS, the requested amendment meets the requirements necessary for issuing a conditional use permit for an outdoor relief area as specified in Richfield's Zoning Code, Section 534.07, Subdivision 24; and WHEREAS, the City has fully considered the request for approval of the amendment; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows: An amended conditional use permit is issued to allow an accessory outdoor relief area, as described in City Council Letter No. , on the Subject Property legally described above. 2. This amended conditional use permit is subject to the following conditions in addition to those specified in Subsections 547.09 and 534.07, Subd. 24 of the City's Zoning Ordinance: • Final landscaping plans shall be submitted to and approved by the Assistant Community Development Director prior to issuance of any permits; • That the property owner is responsible for replacing any landscaping/plant materials that die; • That all 10 parking stalls be maintained and free of snow year round; • That approval of this conditional use permit does not include approval of any signs. Sign permits must be applied for separately; • That the recipient of this conditional use permit record this Resolution with the County, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 462.36, Subd. 1 and the City's Zoning Ordinance Section 546.05, Subd. 7; and • Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit, the applicant shall: a) Submit a copy of the recorded conditional use permit; b) Submit a surety equal to 125% of the value of any landscaping improvements (based on two bids including labor cost) not yet complete. 3. This conditional use permit shall remain in effect for so long as conditions regulating it are observed, and the conditional use permit shall expire if normal operation of the use has been discontinued for 12 or more months, as required by the City's Zoning Ordinance, Section 547.09, Subd. 9. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 13th day of March 2012. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk I 33' o I 2 3 4 EXISTING PARKING (8 SPACES) 5 6 7 8 V-0" q 10 EXISTING BUILDING NEW TECHNITO ARBORVITAE DOUBLE SHREDDED WESTERN RED CEDAR MULCH J 3 L5 GEcMiANusIVY oss enquinquefolio 'Engelmonni' EXISTING BUILDING NEW GREEN WALL 411X411 GALVANIZED WIRE MESH ANCHORED TO WALL EXISTING LOADING DOCK EXISTING BUILDING N SITE PLAN SCALE I/20' 1'-0' D(ISTING BUILDING NEW GREEN WALL 4'X4' GALVANIZED WIRE MESH ANCHORED 4' OUT FROM WALL ENGELMAN IVY N 2 GREEN WALL SECTION SCALE 1/10' - P-0° Woof Central 212016A A1.0 .dgn 2/17/2012 8:20:42 AM MULCH 890 SPACE AS DIRECTED x ON —PLAN —x FINISH GRADE . i e UNDISTURBED 901E BACKFILL SOIL WITH ORGANIC MATTER POTTED STOCK -SCARIFY EDGES OF II IEF ROOT BALL BEFORE PLANTING HOLE DEPTH G• NOTES HEIGHT OF POT MIN. I, AVOID PLANTING IN WET OR SATURATED SOIL TO PREVENT SOIL COMPACTION DURING PLANTING. 2. MULCH LAYER TO EVENLY COVER ENTIRE BED AREA,EXCEPT KEEP MULCH 2' FROM BASE OF SHRUB BRANCHES S. SPACING 'II BETWEEN PLANTS AS DIRECTED ON SITE PLAN CITTO 3 NOSCALE PLANTING D AIL �ENCE TO BE HELD CLOSE TO STEPS TO NOT ALLOW GREATER THAN 311 GAP JJ NEW V BLACK CHAINLINK FENCE WITH BLACK PRIVACY SLATS. PROVIDE NEW SWING GATE W/ PUSH AD EXIT HARDWARE EMOVE PORTION OF WOOD FENCE. ONCRETE PAD 4 POSTS TO REMAIN EXISTING TRASH ENCLOSUR EXISTING ALLEY IIR EMOVE BITUMINOUS It INFILL WITH PEA GRAVEL EW 6' BLACK CHAINLINK ENCE WITH BLACK PRIVACY SLATS PROPERTY LINE T7PR LINE PLANTING SCHEDULE COMMON NAME OTT. BOTANICAL. NAME SIZE AND TYPE ENGELMAN IVY S PmUwcissw q:n Ja. 'Spek v 9 Cm,.k- TECWITO ARBORVITAE 3 TNja rrJdml SmIjOW n0 Cmlurer 2 i i UPPER FLOOR PLAN ITS SCALE 1/20' • V-0' VV �1 FRONT ELEVATION (NEST) SCALE 1/20' - V-0' Woof Central 212016A A1.0 Ago 2/17/2012 8:23:14 AM N 2 LOWER FLOOR PLAN SCALE I—' • V-0' MM Uw T U S H I E MONTGOMERY ARCHITECTS 2 H �Q U)0 � Z W > V Qo LL z W O Z LL Lij aU I HEREBY CERTFY THAT THs SPECIEN;ATION, DR REPdiT NAs PMtEO BY 1E DR DOER NY SIIPERVENIN IlU THA I III A LMFNSED /R oI, i THE R TIE STATE OE WE.1SOTA —T NA1E DATE• LICENSE �•� IssDe 6 Revision Doles DATE CITY SUBMITTAL 02/03/12 CITY SUBMITTAL 02/17/12 212016A FLOOR PLAN 6315 Penn Ave Conditional Use Permit 2/2012 Comprehensive Plan Designations MIXE MIXED i LDR S� LDR MIXED MIXED 63RD ST LDR LDR MIXED MIXED MIXED MIXED LDR LDR MIXED LDR LDR MIXED W Q MIXED ; LDR LDR Q Z Z d MIXED W LDR Lu � LDR J LDR O MIXED MIXED MIXED MIXED LDR MIXED MIXED LD MIXED MIXED MIXED MIXED LDR MIXED LDR MIXED i MIXED N LEGEND MIXED - Mixed Use LDR - Low -Density Residential 0 45 90 180 270 360 Feet I:\GIS\Community Develop ment\Staff\Mel issa\P rojects\Zon i ng Cases\6315 Penn - CRmxd 6315 Penn Ave Conditional Use Permit 2/2012 Surrounding Zoning MU-C MU-C/P R S� R MU C/PAC MU C/PAC 63RD ST MU-C/PAC i R MU-C/PAC R M U-C/PAC R LR R R R MU-C/PAC W Q R LLJ R R Q z Z LLJ MU-C/PAC W R > R :3 R O MU-C/PAC R MU-C/PAC R R M U-C/PAC R R MU-C/PAC MU C/PAC R MU-C/PAC R MU-C/PAC R MU-C/PAC MU-C/PAC N LEGEND MU-C / PAC - Mixed Use Community & Penn Ave Overlay R - Single Family Residential 0 45 90 180 270 360 Feet IAGIS\Community Develop me nt\Staff\Me I issa\P rojects\Zo n i ng Cases\6315 Penn - Zoning.mxd AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # PC LETTER # CASE # NEW BUSINESS 2 2 ..da PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: FEBRUARY 279 2012 ITEM FOR PLANNING COMMISSION INFORMATION: Discuss dates and topics for the 2012-2013 Planning Commission Study Sessions. I. BACKGROUND The Planning Commission typically holds six regularly scheduled study sessions each year. Those meetings are generally scheduled for the second Tuesday of the month at 7:00 p.m. The following dates could be tentatively scheduled for work sessions: Monday, April 9, 2012 Monday, June 11, 2012 Monday, August 13, 2012 Monday, October 8, 2012 Monday, December 10, 2012 Monday, February 11, 2013 In 2011, the Planning Commission opted to hold some study sessions on the fourth Monday of the month at 6:00 p.m., preceding the regularly scheduled meeting. If that option is generally preferred by the Commission, staff recommends the schedule below. Monday, April 23, 2012 — 6:00 p.m. Monday, June 25, 2012 — 6:00 p.m. Monday, August 13, 2012 — 7:00 p.m. Monday, October 22, 2012 — 6:00 p.m. Monday, December 10, 2012 — 7:00 p.m. Monday, February 25, 2013 — 6:00 p.m. If this is the preference, staff also recommends a change to the Planning Commission Bylaws to reflect this preferred schedule. Potential topics include: • Overview of Richfield housing programs • Overview of Richfield rental and point -of -sale inspection programs • Discussion of public financing tools • Transportation project update (end -of -year) • Joint meeting with Edina and Bloomington Planning Commissions • A walking or biking tour of specific area AGENDA SECTION AGENDA ITEM # PC LETTER # W3- NEW BUSINESS 3 3 ..90 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT PC MEETING DATE: FEBRUARY 279 2012 ITEM FOR PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION: Approval of Planning Commission Bylaws. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Review the attached Planning Commission Bylaws. II. BACKGROUND Part 3, Section 3 of our Bylaws requires the Planning Commission to review the Bylaws each year at the February organizational meeting. Staff recommends one change to the Bylaws related to the deadline for acceptance of applications. The Zoning Code requires that applications be submitted at least 28 days prior to the Planning Commission Meeting; however, the Bylaws state that applications will be accepted up until 15 working days preceding the meeting. There is obviously a consistency issue, but more problematic is that 15 working days does not provide enough time to publish legal notices and mail notification to surrounding properties. Staff recommends changing this language to be consistent with the Zoning Code. If the Commission agrees to consider the proposed amendment, it will be presented for formal action at the next regular meeting in accordance with Section 2 of Part III. If the Commission desires changes to the scheduling of "General Planning Meetings" (study sessions), this amendment will also be presented for formal action at the next meeting. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION 1. The above action is required by the Planning Commission Bylaws. 2. Amendments are covered by Section 2 of Part III of the Bylaws requiring presentation at one meeting and 2/3 vote at the following meeting. IV. ATTACHMENTS 1. Planning Commissions Bylaws. BYLAWS AND RULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA The following Bylaws and Rules of procedure are adopted by the City's Planning Commission to facilitate the performance of its duties and functions as empowered under Chapter III, Section 305.05, Subdivision 1-8 of the City Ordinance Code. PART I. MEETINGS Section 1. Regular Meetings Regular meetings of the Planning Commission shall be on the fourth Monday of each month commencing at 7:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers of the City Hall. Section 2. General Planning Meetings The second Monday of every month shall be reserved for discussing and deliberating on general planning matters related to the property development and future well being of the Community. Section 3. Special Meetings Special meetings of the Planning Commission can be called by the Chairperson and one member or by three members of the Commission or at the request of the City Council. Notice, designating the time and place of the meetings, shall be given to all members not less than twenty-four (24) hours in advance thereof. Section 4. Deadline for Hearing Items The Planning Commission will accept all applications to be heard before it, no later than 28 days preceding the regular Planning Commission meeting in accordance with the regulations of the Richfield Zoning Code. Upon written notice to the Community Development Director prior to the Planning Commission meeting, an application may be withdrawn. Once an application is withdrawn, it must be re -filed with the Community Development Department, City of Richfield, before any Planning Commission hearing is held. Section 5. Quorum Five members of the Planning Commission shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. No action shall be taken in the absence of a quorum with the exception that the Planning Commission members present may take testimony for use at a later meeting at which a quorum is present, and may adjourn a meeting to a later time without further notice. Page 2 Section 6. Votinq At all meetings of the Planning Commission, each member attending shall be entitled to cast one vote. Voting shall be by voice. An affirmative vote of a majority of members present shall be necessary for the passage of any matter before the Planning Commission, except as otherwise provided in these Bylaws. Section 7. Proceedings a) Format of Meetin At a regular meeting of the Planning Commission, the following format shall be followed in conducting the business of the meeting. 1) Secretary will note the attendance 2) Approval of Minutes 3) Regular Business and Public Hearing Items 4) New Business 5) Old Business 6) Liaison Reports 7) Adjournment b) Public Hearing The purpose of a hearing is to collect information and facts in order for the Commission to develop a planning recommendation for the City Council. At a public hearing the following procedure shall be followed for each case for which a public hearing is held: 1) Chair shall state the case to be heard. 2) Chair shall call upon the Community Development Director or designee to present the staff report. 3) Chair shall ask the applicant to present his/her case. 4) Members of the Planning Commission shall be allowed to question the applicant about his/her proposal. 5) The Chair shall open the public hearing and all interested persons may address the Commission, giving relevant information regarding the proposal before the Commission. a) All questions or statements by Richfield staff personnel, planning commissioners, applicants or interested citizens will be directed through the Chair. b) All who wish to speak will be heard, but only in accordance with the above procedure and after recognition by the Chair. Page 3 c) No individual may speak longer than five (5) minutes, except through previous arrangement with the Chair, or by vote of the Commission. d) The spokesperson for a group will be allowed ten (10) minutes. e) In addition to the statements by individual or groups, there will be a period, not to exceed thirty (30) minutes, during which the public may question the City's staff members present, the applicant or their representatives or any member of the Planning Commission. Questions must be directed through the Chair. 6) The hearing shall be closed. Interested persons shall not be heard again unless the hearing is reopened by a majority vote of the Commission. 7) The Commission shall discuss and clarify the item before it, and take action on it. 8) Any decision of the Commission on the merits of any planning question before it shall be embodied in the form of a motion, resolution, or report, and referred to the City Council for action. c) Rules of Procedure At all regular meetings of the Planning Commission where formal action is required on a matter before the Commission, the meetings shall be governed by Sturgis' Standard Code of Parliamentary Procedure. At general meetings of the Planning Commission no formal parliamentary procedure shall govern the conduct of the proceedings unless found to be necessary such as when a formal motion is before the Commission. PART IL ORGANIZATION Section 1. Election of Officers At the first regular meeting in February of each year, the Commission shall hold an organizational meeting and elect from its membership a Chairperson, Vice - chairperson, and Secretary. Each member shall cast a ballot for the member he/she wishes to be elected Chairperson. If no one receives a majority of all the members of the Commission, balloting shall continue until one member receives majority support. Vice -chairperson and Secretary shall be elected from the remaining members by the same procedure. Page 4 If the Chairperson resigns from office before the next regular organization meeting, the Vice -chairperson shall automatically become acting Chairperson. If both Chairperson and Vice -chairperson resign, the Secretary shall become acting Chairperson. In any instance, where an officer of the Commission resigns or retires from office a new officer shall be elected to the vacated position at the next regular meeting of the Commission. If the Chairperson, Vice -chairperson, and Secretary are absent from a meeting, the Commission shall elect a temporary Chairperson by voice vote. In the event that the Secretary is absent from a meeting, the Chairperson shall appoint a member of the Commission to approve the minutes of that meeting. Section 2. Tenure The Chairperson, Vice -chairperson, and Secretary shall take office immediately following their election and hold office until their successors are elected and assume office. Section 3. Duties of Officers The duties and powers of the officers of the Planning Commission shall be as follows: a) Chairperson 1) Presides over all meetings of the Commission. 2) Appoints committees and performs such other duties as may be ordered by the Commission. 3) Signs documents of the Commission. 4) Sees that all actions of the Commission are properly taken. 5) Calls special meetings of the Commission in accordance with these Bylaws. 6) Works with appropriate city staff in organizing agendas of all general Planning Commission meetings. b) Vice -chairperson Performs all of the duties and responsibilities of the Chairperson in his/her absence. Page 5 c) Secretary 1) Assumes duties and responsibilities of the Chairperson when both Chairperson and Vice -chairperson are absent. 2) Keeps the minutes of the meetings of the Commission in an appropriate minute book. 3) Signs all minutes of the Commission as well as other official documents of the Commission. PART III. MISCELLANEOUS Section 1. Suspension of Rules The Commission may suspend any of these Rules by a 2/3 vote of those members present. Section 2. Amendments These Rules may be amended at any regular meeting by a 2/3 majority of the members of the Commission, provided that the amendment was presented and written into the minutes of a previous meeting. Section 3. Review The contents of these Bylaws and Rules of procedure should be comprehensively reviewed, evaluated, and modified where necessary, at the organizational meeting held in February of each year. Adopted this 26th day of March, 2012 Chairperson, Richfield Planning Commission Secretary, Richfield Planning Commission AGENDA SECTION AGENDA ITEM # PC LETTER # CASE # NEW BUSINESS 4 4 .wdiW PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT PC MEETING DATE: FEBRUARY 27, 2012 ITEM FOR PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION: Election of Planning Commission Chairperson, Vice -Chairperson and Secretary. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Elect a Planning Commission Chairperson, Vice -Chairperson and Secretary. II. BACKGROUND The Bylaws require that the Planning Commission hold an annual organizational meeting at the first regular meeting in February and elect from its membership a Chairperson, Vice -Chairperson and Secretary. According to the Bylaws (Part II, Organization), a majority vote is necessary to first elect a Chairperson and second to elect the remaining officers. The Chairperson, Vice - Chairperson and Secretary are to take office immediately upon election and hold office until their successors are elected next year. The Chairperson is responsible for conducting all Planning Commission meetings and public hearings. The Chairperson is also responsible for representing the Commission in dealing with the City Council and staff. The Vice -Chairperson is responsible for the duties of the Chairperson in the event the Chairperson is absent. The Secretary is responsible for taking brief minutes during the meeting and reviewing the minutes that staff provides. All approved minutes are signed by the Secretary. The 2011 election results were as follows: Chairperson Jabs, Vice -Chairperson Kitzberger and Secretary Hall. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. LEGAL An annual organizational meeting is required by the Planning Commission Bylaws. AGENDA SECTION AGENDA ITEM # PC LETTER # CASE # NEW BUSINESS .watM PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT PC MEETING DATE: FEBRUARY 27, 2012 ITEM FOR PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION: Appointment of liaisons to the Community Services Advisory Commission, City Council, Housing and Redevelopment Authority, School Board and Transportation Committee. II I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: II The following Planning Commission actions are recommended: Approve members to serve as liaison and alternate liaison to the Community Services Advisory Commission, City Council, Housing and Redevelopment Authority, School Board, and Transportation Committee. II. BACKGROUND Community Services Advisory Commission: The resolution establishing the Community Services Advisory Commission provides that a liaison and alternate from the Planning Commission be appointed to the Community Services Advisory Commission. The Community Services Advisory Commission meets on the third Tuesday of the month at 7:00 P.M., at the Community Center. The Planning Commission should appoint two members to serve as liaison and alternate liaison to the Community Services Advisory Commission. Commissioner Rublein served as liaison to the Community Services Advisory Commission for 2011. City Council: The City Council meets every second and fourth Tuesday at 7:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers at City Hall. Commissioners Hall and Schuller served as co -liaisons to the City Council for 2011. Housing and Redevelopment Authority: The Housing and Redevelopment Authority meets every third Monday at 7:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers at City Hall. Commissioner Root served as liaison to the HRA in 2011. School Board: The Commission also appoints a liaison and alternate liaison to the School Board. The School Board generally meets the first and third Monday of each month at 7:00 P.M. in the District Office Board Room. Commissioner Kitzberger served as liaison to the School Board for 2011. Transportation Commission: The Transportation Commission was appointed by the City Council to review transportation -related topics and make recommendations to the City Council. The Committee meets the first Wednesday of each month at 7:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers at City Hall. Commissioner Scaglia served as liaison to the Transportation Committee in 2011.