112315 PacketPlanning Commission
Agenda
November 23, 2015
7:00 p.m.
Introductory Proceedings
Roll Call
Approval of Minutes: Regular Planning Commission meeting of October 26, 2015.
Opportunity for Citizens to Address the Commission on items not on the Agenda
Public Hearing
ITEM #1 15-ASP-04, 15-VAR- Consider approval of a site plan for modifications to an
07 existing building, construction of an accessory parking lot and
associated variances at 6232 Lyndale Avenue.
New Business
Old Business
Liaison Reports
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: December 14, 2015
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
fF
October 26, 2015
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Rick Jabs and Commissioners Gordon Vizecky,
Erin Vrieze Daniels, Charles Standfuss, Susan Rosenberg, and
Dan Kitzberger
MEMBERS ABSENT:Commissioner Sean Hayford Oleary
STAFF PRESENT: Matt Brillhart, Planning Technician
John Stark, Community Development Director
OTHERS PRESENT: Charles Schatz, 6545 Lyndale Avenue (applicant)
Joe Medvec, 6600 Lyndale Avenue (resident)
Phuong Le, 6600 Portland Avenue (applicant)
Chairperson Jabs called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
M/Vizecky, S/Standfuss to approve the minutes of the September 28, 2015 regular
meeting.
Motion carried: 6-0
OPEN FORUM
No members of the public spoke.
PUBLIC HEARING(S)
ITEM #1
15-VAR-05 — Consider a request for a variance to allow a dynamic (rotating) sign for
Caribou Coffee/Einstein Bros. Bagels at 6545 Lyndale Avenue (Lyndale Station)
Planning Technician Matt Brillhart presented the staff report.
In response to a question from Commissioner Standfuss, Brillhart stated the sign would be
internally lit.
Joe Medvec (6600 Lyndale Avenue) asked for confirmation that the sign was on the north
side of the building facing LA Fitness. Brillhart confirmed.
October 26, 2015
M/Vizecky, S/Rosenberg to close the public hearing.
Motion carried: 6-0
In response to a question from Commissioner Vrieze Daniels, Brillhart stated the sign
would be lit similar to other building signs and would not flash.
M/Vizecky, S/Standfuss to approve the variance.
Motion carried: 6-0
ITEM #2
15-CUP-04, 15-VAR-04 — Consider a Conditional Use Permit and variances to allow
an automobile repair business at 6600 Portland Avenue.
Brillhart presented the staff report.
In response to questions from Chair Jabs, Brillhart clarified that it was a reuse of the
existing building, not a teardown. Brillhart stated that vehicular access to the site would
remain as existing. Due to location of medians leading up to roundabout, access is
restricted to right-in, right-out only.
In response to a question from Commissioner Standfuss, Brillhart stated that the
underground fuel tanks were removed. Community Development Director John Stark
stated that the previous owner had followed MN PCA cleanup requirements.
M/Vizecky, S/Vrieze Daniels to close the public hearing.
Motion carried: 6-0
Commissioners Vizecky and Vrieze Daniels noted they were grateful to see the site find a
user. M/Standfuss, S/Vrieze Daniels to recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit
and variances.
Motion carried: 6-0
ITEM #3
15-VAR-06 — Cancel public hearing for 7134 Cedar Avenue
M/Vizecky, S/Kitzberger to cancel the public hearing.
Motion carried: 6-0
NEW BUSINESS
Chair Jabs brought up the issue of commissioner attendance at Planning Commission
meetings and urged commissioners to attend every meeting.
2
October 26, 2015
ITEM #4
PC Letter No. 17 — Reschedule December meeting
M/Vizecky, S/Standfuss to reschedule the meeting to December 14.
Motion carried: 6-0
OLD BUSINESS
None.
LIAISON REPORTS
Community Services Advisory Commission: Chair Jabs — Monroe Park stormwater improvement
City Council: No report
HRA: No report
Richfield School Board: Commissioner Kitzberger— School board election Nov. 3
Transportation Commission: No report
Chamber of Commerce: Commissioner Vizecky— Chamber 60th Anniversary Dec. 10
Other: None
CITY PLANNER'S REPORT
No report.
ADJOURNMENT
M/Vizecky, S/Vrieze Daniels to adjourn the meeting.
Motion carried: 6-0
The meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 7:25 p.m.
Gordon Vizecky
Secretary
3
AGENDA SECTION: PUBLIC HEARING
AGENDA ITEM# 1
REPORT#
CASE# 15-ASP-04, 15-VAR-
07
P PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
PC MEETING DATE: NOVEMBER 23, 2015
ITEM FOR PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION:
Public hearing to consider a request for site plan approval and variances to allow the partial
demolition of an existing building and construction of accessory parking lot.
I.RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Conduct and close a public hearing and by motion: Recommend
approval of a site plan for modifications to an existing building,
construction of an accessory parking lot and associated variances at
6232 Lyndale Avenue.
II. BACKGROUND
The building at 6232 Lyndale Avenue has been vacant since June of this year when the
building was purchased by Contract Collection Systems and vacated by Nelvin's Paint
and Body Shop. The site had been approved for and used as an auto body and paint
shop since 1964. The use was approved with three parking stalls immediately in front
of the building; these stalls extended into the public right-of-way. No outside storage of
vehicles was permitted, including on the adjacent land to the north, which at the time of
approval was part of another parcel that has been removed for construction of
Highways 62 and 35W. This parcel is the second-smallest commercial property in the
City. The only smaller parcel is home to the seasonal Dairy Queen at
66t" Street and
Nicollet Avenue.
The new property owner would like to lease the building for something other than auto
body and paint work. In order to change the use of the building, the applicant must
meet or approach current Code requirements for the new use. This includes removing
all parking from public right-of-way. The applicant and City have explored a variety of
options. Ownership of the remnant land to the north is to be transferred from MnDOT to
the City. When this occurs, the City would be willing to consider leasing the area to the
property owner to provide additional parking; however, this process has been very slow
and staff is unable to estimate when this transfer will occur. In the meantime, the
applicant is proposing to reduce the footprint of the building and to provide three legal
parking spaces in front and one stall behind the building in order to lease the building for
office or service use. With a credit for transit proximity, the minimum parking
requirement for an office of this size is six stalls. The applicant is requesting a variance
for approval with only four stalls.
While redevelopment of this entire block would be ideal, staff is supportive of the
proposed site plan and requested parking variance because it improves upon current
conditions. Specifically, the reduced building size and placement of large planters along
Lyndale Avenue will improve a dangerous situation in which parked cars hang over into
the public right-of-way and utilize the sidewalk as part of the drive aisle to exit via the
property to the south. As a condition of the requested variance from parking minimums,
staff has discussed with the applicant a stipulation that limits use of the building to low-
intensity service and office uses such as insurance, chiropractic care, acupuncture or
similar uses. Staff also recommends a stipulation that allows an administrative
modification to this approval should the lot to the north become available for additional
parking.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
The General Business (C-2) District allows for a wide variety of retail and service
businesses. Site plan approval is required prior to the construction or alternation of any
building in the City.
General Requirements
The proposed building reduction and site improvements will improve upon existing
conditions that are dangerous, while allowing for reuse and aesthetic improvements to a
very difficult site. The applicant is requesting a variance from minimum parking
requirements and parking lot setbacks. All other existing conditions that do not meet
current Code requirements are considered legally nonconforming and may continue.
Variances Requested: Required (R), Proposed (P)
Minimum parking setback (R: 15 ft.; P: 0-1.5 ft.)
o A parking stall cannot be accommodated behind the building without
setback variances. Staff feels that this additional stall is necessary for
reuse of this building and that the addition of this striped stall will, in
realty, not change the existing condition. A fence and curb will be
added along the rear property line to further screen and protect the
adjacent residential parcel. Additionally, parking lots are required to be
a minimum of three feet from adjacent right-of-way or five feet from
adjacent commercial property. The setback along the northern property
line has been reduced to zero. While designated right-of-way, it is
anticipated that this land will either remain vacant or eventually become
a contiguous parking lot, making the setback unnecessary.
Off-Street Parking (R: 6 stalls; P: 4 stalls)
o With a reduction for proximity to frequently-operating transit, Code
requires 6 parking spaces for a 1,760 sq. ft. office. In the future,
additional parking may be available on the remnant parcel to the north.
For the time being, staff is supportive of a variance due to the
narrowness of the lot, so long as the uses are limited to those with very
low parking needs. Staff recommends allowances for an administrative
approval of either more intense office use or retail use should parking to
the north become available.
Additional information related to the requested variances and required findings can be
found in the attached document.
General Criteria for Site Plan Evaluation
In evaluating a site plan, the Planning Commission and City Council shall consider its
compliance with the following criteria which are discussed more fully in the attached
requirements document:
Consistency with the various elements and objectives of the City's
Comprehensive Plan.
Consistency with the purposes of the City Code.
Consistency and harmony with the general appearance of neighboring
developed areas and open spaces.
An internal sense of order and provision of a desirable environment.
Appropriateness of the amount and arrangement of open space and
landscaping, the building materials, textures and colors.
Adequacy of circulation and parking for all modes of transport.
Use of energy-conserving design.
Protection of adjacent and neighboring properties from negative environmental
impacts.
This site is identified for Community Commercial use in the Comprehensive Plan and is
one of the first properties that people see when entering Richfield from either the
Crosstown or Minneapolis. The site has major challenges: the building essentially
extends from property line to property line, the only access to the rear of the property is
through the overhead doors within the building, existing parking is within the City's right-
of-way, etc. While staff would prefer to see wholesale redevelopment of this block, the
potential for this with only a half-block of depth is limited — as is evident in other
commercial corridors throughout the City. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the need
for improving gateways to the community — creating a visual means of welcoming
people to Richfield. Investment and improvement of this property will help to strengthen
what was begun with the installation of the Richfield monument sign just to the north.
Other criteria listed are improved, if not completely met (e.g. circulation, parking).
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
A survey is required prior to the issuance of any permits.
A cross access agreement with the property to the south (6234 Lyndale Ave)
must be recorded.
Stormwater corrections required by the Public Works Department must be
made.
Uses shall be limited to very low intensity businesses.
If the remnant parcel to the north becomes available for additional parking,
staff shall be authorized to approve an amendment allowing for general
commercial/business uses.
C. FINANCIAL
The required application fee has been paid.
D. LEGAL
Notification: Notice of this public hearing was published in the Sun Current in
accordance with State and Local requirements. Properties within 350 feet
were notified by mail.
Council consideration is scheduled for December 8, 2015.
IV. ALTERNATTVE RECOMMENDATTON(S)
Recommend approval of the proposal with modifications.
Recommend denial with a finding that the proposed use does not meet
requirements.
V. ATTACHMENTS
Resolution
Requirements document
Proposed plans
Planning & zoning maps
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
Dean Trongard — owner representative
Michael Monn - architect
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION GRANTING APPROVAL
OF A SITE PLAN
AND VARIANCES AT
6232 LYNDALE AVENUE
WHEREAS, an application has been filed with the City of Richfield which requests
approval of site plans for an office/service building on the parcel of land located at 6232
Lyndale Avenue (the "Property"), legally described as:
THE NORTH '/2 OF LOT 3, BLOCK 1, FALLDEN'S ADDITION, HENNEPIN COUNTY,
MINNESOTA
WHEREAS, the proposed site plan is for a lot that is approximately 37.5 feet wide and
4,687.5 square feet in area; and
WHEREAS, the proposed site plan allows for parking lot setbacks of 0 — 1.5 feet; and
WHEREAS, the City Code requires a minimum parking lot setback of 15 feet from
Residential property and 3 feet from right-of-way; and
WHEREAS, the proposed site plan includes space for the parking of 4 vehicles; and
WHEREAS, the City Code requires a minimum 6 stalls for a 1,760 square foot office;
and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes Section 462.357, Subdivision 6, provides for the
granting of variances to the literal provisions of the zoning regulations in instances where their
enforcement would cause "practical difficulty" to the owners of the property under
consideration; and
WHEREAS, based on the findings below, the Richfield City Council approves the
requested variances from Richfield City Code Subsections 534.11, Subdivisions 1; 534.11,
Subd. 6; and 544.13, Subd. 6; and
WHEREAS, the City has fully considered the request for approval for the site plan with
variances; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
Richfield, Minnesota, as follows:
1. The City Council makes the following general findings:
a. The Property is zoned General Business.
b. Office and service uses are permitted in the General Business District.
C.The site and building are existing, and have been used for automobile repair and
painting since 1964.
d. The site is the second smallest commercially zoned property in the City.
e.Reuse of this building on this site in any fashion will require variances.
f.Code states that the minimum parking lot setback from adjacent single-family
residential property is 15 feet. A variance from Subsection 534.11, Subd. 1 is
required.
g. Code states that the minimum parking lot setback adjacent to right-of-way can be
reduced to three feet in cases where modifications are being made to an existing
lot. A variance from Subsection 534.11, Subd. 6 is required.
h. Code states that the minimum required parking for a 1,760 square foot office is 6
spaces. The proposed site plan includes 4 parking stalls. A variance from
Subsection 544.13, Subd. 6 is required.
2. With respect to the application for variances from the above-listed requirements, the
City Council makes the following findings:
a. Strict enforcement of the Richfield Zoning Code Subsections listed above would
cause a practical difficulty. The existing property cannot be used in any fashion
without variances; only site assembly could alleviate all issues. The proposal
can be adequately accommodated with the proposed conditions to limit the
intensity of the permitted businesses.
b.Unique circumstances affect the Property that were not created by the land
owner. The existing lot was created and building constructed prior to the
adoption of current Codes. These circumstances were not created by the land
owner.
C.Granting the requested variances will not alter the essential character of the
neighborhood. The requested variances will allow the reuse and improvement of
a challenging site and building. The improvements proposed will benefit the
surrounding neighborhood by improving the parking and pedestrian conditions as
well as the aesthetics of the site.
d. The variances requested are the minimum necessary to alleviate the practical
difficulty. The proposed variances are the minimum necessary to reuse this
property.
e. The variance is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the ordinance
and consistent with the comprehensive plan. The proposed variance will allow
reuse and improvement of a building on a significantly constrained site.
3. With respect to the proposed site plan, the City Council finds that it will adequately
serve the purpose for which it is proposed and will not have adverse effect upon the
public safety or general welfare.
4. Based upon the above findings, variances to the above-specified requirements are
hereby approved.
5. Based upon the above findings and variances, the proposed site plan is hereby
approved according to the terms of Richfield City Code Subsection 547.13 with the
following additional stipulations:
a) A survey and revised site plan are required prior to the issuance of any permits.
b) Parking must be striped in accordance with the approved plan and all parking stalls
must be accessible year-round.
c) A cross access agreement with the property located at 6234 Lyndale Avenue is
required and must be recorded prior to occupancy. Proof of recording must be
provided to the City.
d) Uses are limited to low-intensity service and office uses such as insurance,
chiropractic care, acupuncture or similar uses approved by the Community
Development Director.
e) If and when additional off-site parking becomes available, the Community
Development Director or designee is authorized to consider an administrative
amendment to this approval which would allow additional uses with greater demand
for parking.
f) Building permits shall not be issued until stormwater plans have been submitted to
and approved by the Public Works Department.
g) Required planters in front of the building must be continuously maintained and
include live plant materials during the spring, summer can fall and decor during the
winter months.
h) All trash must be stored inside the building.
i) The applicant is responsible for any necessary environmental remediation on the
site in order to protect adjacent and neighboring properties from negative
environmental impacts. Any plans for necessary environmental remediation must be
approved by the Community Development Director (or designee) and/or any State of
Minnesota or other appropriate government agency having jurisdiction.
j) The applicant is responsible for obtaining all required permits, compliance with all
requirements detailed in the City's Administrative Review Committee Report dated
November 5, 2015, and compliance with all other City and State regulations.
Permits are required prior to commencement of any work;
k) That the recipient of this approval record this Resolution with the County, pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes Section 462.36, Subd. 1 and the City's Zoning Ordinance
Section 547.11, Subd. 7. Proof of recording is required prior to the issuance of a
building permit;
1) Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit, the applicant shall submit a surety
equal to 125% of the value of any improvements (based on two bids including labor
cost) not yet complete.
m) This approval shall expire one year from the date of approval unless the use has
commenced or a building permit has been obtained and construction begun.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 8th day of December
2015.
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk
Part 1 - Site Plan Approval (Subsection 547.13)
In evaluating a site plan, the Planning Commission and Council shall consider its
compliance with the following:
a) Consistency with the various elements and objectives of the City's long range
plans including, but not limited to, the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed use
of the property for low-intensity office or service use is not inconsistent with the
guiding Community Commercial designation. Additionally, the Comprehensive
Plan discusses the need for improving gateways to the community and the
proposal would
b) Consistency with the purposes of the Zoning Code. The purposes of the Zoning
Code include: assisting in the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan;
creating harmonious and workable relationships among land uses; enhancing
and protecting the physical appearance of the City and more. The proposal is
consistent with these purposes of the Zoning Code.
c) Preservation of the site in its natural state, insofar as practicable, by minimizing
tree and soil removal, and designing any grade changes so as to be in keeping
with the general appearance of neighboring developed or developing areas. The
site is already fully developed and is 100 percent impervious. The proposed
building and site have been designed so as to compliment and improve the
surrounding area.
d) Creation of a harmonious relationship of buildings and open spaces with the
terrain and with existing and future buildings having a visual relationship to the
proposed development. The proposed building fagade is complimentary to the
adjacent building on the property to the south. The site design reduces auto and
pedestrian safety issues.
e) Creation of a functional and harmonious design for structures and site features
including:
i. Creation of an internal sense of order for the various functions and
buildings on the site and provision of a desirable environment for
occupants, visitors and the general community;
ii.Appropriateness of the amount and arrangement of open space and
landscaping to the design and function of the development;
iii. Appropriateness of the materials, textures, colors and details of
construction as an expression of the design concept of the project and
the compatibility of the same with the adjacent and neighboring
structures and functions; and
iv. Adequacy of vehicular, cycling and pedestrian circulation, including
walkways, interior drives and parking, in terms of location and number
of access points to the public streets, width of interior drives and
access points, general interior circulation, separation of pedestrian,
cycling and vehicular traffic and arrangement and amount of parking so
as to be safe, convenient and, insofar as practicable, compatible with
the design of proposed buildings, structures and neighboring
properties.
This site is significantly constrained; however, the proposal will provide safe and
adequate space for the low-intensity use that is proposed. This site will likely
never be able to accommodate a business or use with high customer traffic or
turnover.
f) Creation of an energy-conserving design through design location, orientation and
elevation of structures, the use and location of glass in structures, and the use of
landscape materials and site grading. The proposal will not worsen conditions.
g) Protection of adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provisions
for such matters as surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers, preservation
of views, light and air, and those aspects of design, not adequately covered by
other regulations, which may have substantial effects on neighboring land uses.
Adequate provisions are included in the approval stipulations to protect adjacent
properties.
Part 2 -Variances:
The proposed building reduction and site improvements will improve upon existing
conditions that are dangerous, while allowing for reuse and aesthetic improvements
to a very difficult site. The applicant is requesting a variance from minimum parking
requirements and parking lot setbacks. All other existing conditions that do not meet
current Code requirements are considered legally nonconforming and may continue.
Subsection 534.11, Subd. 1:
o Parking lot setback— 15 feet from adjacent single-family residential
proposed 1.5 feet)
Subsection 534.11, Subd. 6:
o Minimum parking lot setback from right-of-way— 3 ft. (proposed 0 ft.)
Subsection 544.13, Subd. 6:
o Required off-street parking for office use is 6 stalls (proposed 4 stalls)
The findings necessary to approve variances are as follows (Subsection. 547.11):
a) There are "practical difficulties"that prevent the property owner from using the
property in a reasonable manner. It is reasonable to allow the reuse of an
existing building on an existing lot. The applicant's proposal includes
improvements where possible and will improve the site overall, especially in
regard to auto and pedestrian safety.
b) There are usual or unique circumstances that apply to the property which were
not created by the applicant and do not apply generally to other properties in the
same zone or vicinity. This lot was created prior to existing codes that dictate the
minimum size and width required for a commercial property. The building was
constructed in 1964. The applicant did not create this situation, but rather has
proposed a scenario that offers reuse of a difficult property and improvements
that will be apparent to the community. There are relatively few properties that
are this constrained in the City.
c) The variance would not alter the character of the neighborhood or the locality.
The proposed variances will improve safety in this area and the aesthetics of the
property. No negative impacts are expected.
d) The variance is the minimum necessary to alleviate the practical difficulty. The
proposed variances are the minimum necessary to reuse this property.
e) The variance is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the ordinance
and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed plans are consistent
with the general purposes and intents of the Zoning Ordinance and
Comprehensive Plan as discussed further in Part 1 of this document.
O
Lf)
o
rA C , bt
Li
W z n
FT anuaAV OILIPUXrl
Li
T.———————————————-
ww
x
oz v< a2 nwiw
El C=O
aw 2a ?6 ,
09 za a2
iS
x
0 0
c C)
o n
@ @ @
L—L i
Ln
rq
0 r\l
C
II
O01
j-Z Z
II II
J-8 ii II
II
u
LI
p
IL----------------------------------------
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
I
Id
I
i l l
u i
IH
Hl
dH
F]i
F11
I— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
11
LI
II u
ri
r-——------------------
CC),
r
7 -- --------
L------------------—
LL---
T-1
uc
xa
1
71
Z'
ccCC)
3
wl
i,2 7
z
z 7
cc
7 75
z
ul
Z-4;iic L
CLU
Lc) i LLL
O J
N N
N
r o a o 0 0
g o
L
c 1'1 O H
U U U
W Ib
LYNDALE AVE
c
1 E
U
d
U U n D
a' U
U
0
w
E
nip
y U
Q
J
Ey °1'N a
L o 0 0 E
E°' E
C N
N Eo o
E.
E.M.N i o J
U
fr 0 x
U 0=pld
U 72
Z
N
LO i a Q
O
N
J
N
f HL M
A/ a
CC
f0
A
w Q a
LYNDALE AVE
r C
1 a
o
W U U
0
EE
G1 L E
U
m U
T QJoT
N L)LL
N loom m