Loading...
2019-09-24 Planning Comm Agenda Packet CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA SEPTEMBER 24, 2019 7:00 PM- Mendota Heights City Hall 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights MN 55118 1. Call to Order / Roll Call 2. Adopt Agenda 3. Approval of the August 27, 2019 regular meeting minutes 4. Public Hearings a. Case No. 2019-25: Variance to allow a new gymnasium at Somerset Elementary School to exceed the maximum structure height of 25-ft. in the R-1 District to a measured height of 30-ft., located at 1355 Dodd Road (Independent School District #197 - Applicant) b. Case No. 2019-26: Critical Area Permit to allow the construction of a new single-family dwelling in the Mississippi River Critical Corridor Area, located at 1135 Orchard Place (Matthew Mosvick – Applicant) c. Case No. 2019-27: Zoning Code Amendment to City Code Section 12-1G-7.F, which would either modify or eliminate the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) standard for all uses in the I- Industrial District. (City of Mendota Heights / Metro Storage LLC – Applicants) d. Case No. 2019-20: Conditional Use Permit and Variance for new personal self-storage facility in the I-Industrial Zone – located at 1178 Northland Drive (Metro Storage, LLC – Applicants) – TABLED from the August 24, 2019 meeting 5. Staff Announcements / Updates a) Reminder - October 22nd meeting start time at 8:00 pm (due to Simchat Torah holiday) 6. Adjourn Meeting Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities are available upon request at least 120 hours in advance. If a notice of less than 120 hours is received, the City of Mendota Heights will make every attempt to provide the aids, however, this may not be possible on short notice. Please contact City Hall at 651.452.1850 with requests. August 27, 2019 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 1 of 13 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES August 27, 2019 The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, August 27, 2019 in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve at 7:00 P.M. The following Commissioners were present: Chair Mary Magnuson, Commissioners John Mazzitello, Patrick Corbett, Michael Noonan, Michael Toth, Brian Petschel, and Andrew Katz. Those absent: None Approval of Agenda The agenda was approved as submitted. Approval of July 23, 2019 Minutes COMMISSIONER MAZZITELLO MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KATZ TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF JULY 23, 2019 AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 ABSTAIN: 1 (NOONAN) Hearings A) PLANNING CASE 2019-20 METRO STORAGE, LLC, 1178 NORTHLAND DRIVE –CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCE for NEW SELF STORAGE USE Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that Metro Storage, LLC was requesting a Conditional Use Permit and Variance to develop a new climate controlled self-storage facility in the Industrial Park. The storage facility would be located on the vacant parcel located at the southeast corner of Northland Drive and Highway 55 (1178 Northland Drive). Hearing notices were published and mailed to all properties within 350-ft. of the site; no comments or objections to this request were received. The parcel is 2.2 acres in size and is currently guided and zoned I-Industrial. The property was previously owned by General Pump (next door) and has been sitting vacant for a number of years. The initial review of this application revealed the possibility of a wetland on the site. According to the Dakota County GIS mapping, the 2011 National Wetland Inventory layer showed a PEM1A wetland on the site. The applicant hired Kjolhaug Environmental Services to inspect and perform August 27, 2019 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 2 of 13 a wetland assessment. The report came back and indicated no wetlands were present or delineated on the subject parcel. Metro Storage provided some concept images of their proposed building – a new three-story, 117,810 square foot, fully contained, climate controlled, interior only self-storage facility. It has light-colored limestone features, precast panels along the front, nice break-up of color with some glass curtain walls on the entryway. Mr. Benetti shared images or renderings of what the building would look like. Site and Structure Requirements for Industrial District uses: • Not more than 50% of the lot area shall be occupied by buildings o Current plan occupies 41% of the lot area • Structure Height: no structure shall exceed 45-feet in height o Current building roof line is 42.5-feet with the upper parapet at 44.5-feet • Side yard abutting a street on a corner lot shall be not less than 40-feet in width (40-feet from Northland Drive and 40-feet from Highway 55); 30-feet from the side yard; and 50- feet from the rear yard o Facility will have a setback of 40-feet from Highway 55 and off of Northland Drive o The east side roadway is not technically a roadway – it more of a private drive • Floor area ratio (FAR) shall not exceed 0.5 o The sites FAR equated out to 1.24%; thus the need for the Variance request • Minimum Lot Area Requirement is 1 acre with a minimum lot width of 100 feet o This site is 3.76 acres in size and is 153-feet wide along Northland Drive and 255- feet along the MnDOT ROW • Parking setbacks require 20-feet and 10-feet from the side yard • Parking population netted out to approximately 15 required spaces; they are providing over 22 spaces Interior Space: • Front entry point and office in the front • Exit point in the back • Internal hallways separated out • 11 interior parking spaces for loading and unloading • 21 new track wall-mount style lights – no pole lights Grading/Drainage/Utility Plan: • Very little grading on the site • Infiltration Basin on the south side of the building with drainage swales and inlets; to be tied to an existing 15-inch storm pipe leading out to a wetland feature in the Minnesota Department of Transportation Right-of-Way (MnDOT ROW) • Infiltration Basin along the west side of the building till take stormwater drainage from the north parking lot area and roof drains from the building • Building utilities will be tied into the existing main service lines underneath Northland Drive to the north August 27, 2019 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 3 of 13 • Water service will be provided to the building by a 1-inch copper service line for typical/potable water needs • Fire suppression or interior sprinkler systems will be serviced by a 6-inch ductile iron pipe • Sanitary service will be provided by a new 6-inch PVC pipe, with a clean-out located at the angled junction of said line Landscape Plan: • Reviewed by the city’s Master Gardeners, who suggested the following changes (recommendations, not requirements: o Substituting ironwood trees for the river birch o Replacing the velvet crabs with serviceberry species o Replace tor spirea bushes with Little Bluestem species o Replace sumacs with honeysuckle, serviceberry, chokeberry, or prairie drop seed grasses o Replace the proposed rock mulch bed with shredded wood mulch o Substitute the MnDOT 25-121 seed mix with a preferred MnDOT or other native seed mix • Landscape plan was revised and resubmitted with some of the recommended changes Mr. Benetti then reviewed the criteria to be met in the granting of a CUP (Title 12-1L-6): a. Not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the community b. Nor will cause serious traffic congestion nor hazards c. Nor will seriously depreciate surrounding property value, and d. That the same is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this chapter and the comprehensive plan He then reviewed the conditions to be met per the code amendment that now allows for personal self-storage uses as a conditional use in the Industrial Zone: A. Any and all storage shall be inside the building. Exterior storage of personal vehicles, recreational vehicles, trailers, and equipment is strictly prohibited. B. The storage facility shall have a security system adequate to limit access to persons renting at the facility. C. Facility shall not be located closer than one-quarter (1/4) mile from any residential use and/or residential zone. D. All drive aisles and parking surfaces must be curb and guttered, with asphalt or concrete. E. The use shall have no more than three (3) overhead doors or bays to be used for entering/exiting the facility. F. Access to any fenced-in exterior area shall be available to emergency responders in a manner acceptable to the fire marshal. G. Common parking space available to all visitors shall be provided at a rate no less than one space per six thousand (6,000) square feet of storage area. Staff believed that all of these conditions / standards have been met. Mr. Benetti then reviewed the criteria or standards to be met when granting a Variance and the applicant’s response to those standards: August 27, 2019 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 4 of 13 1. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not otherwise permitted by the zoning ordinance 2. The plight of the property owner is due to circumstances unique to the property, not created by the property owner 3. The Variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood; and economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties The Variance is required because the Floor Area Ratio (FAR), at 1.24, exceeds the allowable 0.5. Mr. Benetti researched other neighboring cities and beyond and found that the buildings in their Industrial Zones ranged from 30%-35% (Inver Grove Heights and Eagan) and up to 50% (West St. Paul). The maximum lot coverage ranged from 70%-75% to 95%. Bloomington and St. Paul are the only ones that have an FAR, and they range from 1.0 to 2.0. Most of the neighboring cities do not use or apply an FAR. We also limit out building height and footprint and impervious surface percentages. Mr. Benetti explained that the applicant’s plans demonstrate that all of the Industrial Zone standards are being met, except for the FAR. Staff recommended that the Commission give serious consideration to this application because the FAR is probably a bit more of what they should expect in a community of the size of Mendota Heights and that this Variance is only for the personal self-storage use and shall apply specifically to this site and its use only. Staff recommended approval of this application based on the findings and with conditions. Commissioner Petschel asked why there was not an option to approve the Conditional Use Permit but deny the Variance. Mr. Benetti replied that this is an option if the Commission so wished. However, the applicant would prefer that the Variance be approved. If the Commission were to approve the CUP without the Variance, they would essentially be approving a 1-story building. Commissioner Noonan asked if they were to only approve the CUP, would the applicant have to come back and rework their site plan and thus, get a renewed approval of the CUP. Mr. Benetti replied that may be a possibility. Commissioner Petschel asked if denying the Variance would cause time penalties for re- application on the site. Mr. Benetti replied that it would not cause any time penalties, as there are no time penalties for CUP’s or Variances. Chair Magnuson, noting that the city only has an FAR of 0.5, stated that they were limiting any development of any remaining area within the Industrial Park to single-story structures. Mr. Benetti concurred. She then asked, when the City Council considered the amendment to the ordinance, was there any conversation about changing the FAR requirement. Mr. Benetti replied that he had a discussion with the former planner and he indicated that this FAR never came up in the discussions on the August 27, 2019 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 5 of 13 ordinance. He was shocked when he heard about it because it had never been an issue but that he probably should have changed it when the ordinance was updated several years ago. Commissioner Noonan disagreed as the Industrial Park was developed under an FAR of 0.5 and it was never brought up as an issue before. This is an interesting one because it is proposing an FAR of significantly higher than what others in the Industrial Park have worked with. To suggest a 3- story building cannot be done with a 0.5 FAR is not an accurate statement. Commissioner Mazzitello stated that the 0.5 FAR rule has existed as the Industrial Park has developed. It does not mean that the Industrial Park was developed under the 0.5 FAR; it was just in code. The Sun Country headquarters is just one example of a multi-story building in the Industrial Park that was developed under a time when they had to have an expansive surface parking lot for the building. Their lot is big enough to lower their FAR. This is a unique situation under consideration; where the lot is small, the building being proposed fits on the lot. It is important to realize that this FAR rule applies to the entire Industrial Zone and he would be willing to provide an expensive dinner if every lot in the Industrial Zone were developed within the 0.5 FAR; but that is that they weren’t. Commissioner Petschel asked what if they wanted to build a 7-story building. Commissioner Mazzitello replied they would run into the height restriction. Commissioner Petschel stated that it was only a restriction; to apply a one restriction arbitrarily as opposed to another. Commissioner Mazzitello stated that his point was that the FAR was an antiquated requirement. FAR, antiquated or not, conversations continued. It was pointed out that if the proposed building were to remain inside the current footprint and have only one story, it would be below the required FAR of 0.5. Commissioner Toth, going back to the timeframe between 2009 and 2014, this lot was identified as a wetland. Now coming back to July 26, 2019 it is not a wetland. He asked if there was a misunderstanding or if additional soil was placed on the property. Mr. Benetti replied that it has been his experience working with wetland mapping, especially from a National Wetland Inventory, it is generalized or best estimate sometimes. Sometimes it is based on old historical interpretation of aerial mapping. The GIS mapping flags the city to inform owners or applicants that there is potential for a wetland and they need to investigate for accuracy. If the Wetland Report, done independently, comes back and says there is a wetland, then they would have been talking about how to mitigate that on site or do some other type on-site mitigation. Fortunately, that is why they hired these people to come out and do an independent testing or analysis and they came back and said there was no longer a wetland on the site. Mr. Bob Heilman, VP of Development with Metro Storage, Mr. Quinn Hutson of CNH Architects, and their engineer from Wier & Associates came forward. Mr. Heilman answered the question regarding the wetland by stating the parcel, through their investigation in Phase 1, was an area that was used by MnDOT as an off-ramp relocation when they did the roadwork. There is approximately 6-feet of fill on that site – it goes from 6-feet to approximately 12-feet. None of that is natural material. This was done before the 2000’s. August 27, 2019 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 6 of 13 Mr. Heilman then gave a brief history on Metro Storage and their footprint in the Minneapolis/St. Paul metro area. As for the FAR, Mr. Heilman stated that what they have experienced is that the issue is the intensity of their use is so low – basically the lowest use; however, the FAR is high and the intensity of the use is so low that they offset each other. Also, in this case, they are meeting all other aspects of the code – height, building coverage, impervious surface coverage – he could essentially build the same building but with only one floor and no one could tell from looking at the outside. They find this to be inconsistent with the FAR – it does not match the other codes to be found in the zoning code. Mr. Hutson continued with highlights of the specific building by sharing an image of the site plan and explaining that they are not pushing the limits of the site but putting in a building that is proportionate to the site. He also shared a rendering of the building elevation. Addressing the FAR issue, Mr. Hutson noted that looking at the building from the outside it matches other buildings in the Industrial Park – including ones with high ceilings inside. They are just a different type use and that is what makes it different. This use is different than other industrial uses permitted in the park. The only thing that brings up the FAR is how they use the inside of the building. Commissioner Petschel asked if Mr. Hutson could provide any type of argument as to why they have a practical difficulty. Mr. Hutson replied that they feel that the practical difficulty is that the FAR is inconsistent with this particular approved industrial use – because of its extreme low intensity the FAR does not consider that in the way that it would for other types of industrial buildings. They feel that is a hardship for this particular type of use. Commissioner Noonan stated that the FAR is a standard across the entire Industrial Area; it is not specifically targeted to this use. So it is a standard that applies across the industrial and it is not specifically targeted to this site or to this use. Commissioner Noonan was having a hard time with that explanation as a practical difficulty since it is a universal standard across the entire Industrial Area. Mr. Hutson agreed that the standard is universal across the Industrial Area; however, it would be a hardship for any site that would be considering this use. Commissioner Noonan asked, when the zoning was amended to add personal storage in the Industrial Area, why was that not raised as a discussion point given the fact that the standards were published and existed. His understanding was that all that was asked for was to add personal storage as a permitted use within the Industrial Area and not seek to do any modifications to the zoning standards. Mr. Heilman replied that they had an idea on the design of the building; however, they were just attending to the use at that point in time. It was a general use for the area and that was their concentration at that time. Commissioner Noonan noted that one could suggest that a general use should operate under the zoning standards that were there and were posted. If there were a fundamental difficulty they should have been raised and discussed as part of the zoning change. Mr. Heilman replied that he could see Commissioner Noonan’s point; however, this is a use that is fairly new to zoning – it August 27, 2019 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 7 of 13 was never conceived even ten or fifteen years ago. That is why Metro Storage is here, they are asking for the change based on this new type of use of storage – multi-story, climate controlled, interior, generation five storage. A lot of municipalities he goes to have nothing in their code regarding self-storage. So they go along and develop it as they go through the approval process. Their stance is that FAR is partially to limit intensity on a property. They are coming from the equation with the lowest, other than cemetery, intensity of use for a building. Commissioner Toth asked approximately how many storage units would be in the building. Mr. Heilman replied that based on rentable square footage of 83,000, the units on average are approximately 100 (some at 25 square feet and some as high as 300 square feet) – so that would equate to approximately 810 to 830 rental units. Commissioner Toth then questioned the amount of traffic that the building may see on the average day with the number of parking spaces they have – how did they come up with those numbers. They have said many times that this would be a low traffic area, but now they are looking at 800+ rental units and they are saying that it would be a low volume of traffic. Metro Storage was estimating (one space per 6,000 square feet). Mr. Heilman replied that this comes from the National Institute of Traffic Engineers and their manual, which includes key studies for various different uses of facilities. Commissioner Katz asked if their personal data for Metro Storage matched the data from the National Institute of Traffic Engineers. Mr. Heilman replied that within the storage sector, the typical product is about the same size as is being proposed. Commissioner Katz clarified his question by asking if Metro Storage had other facilities of this size and are they seeing traffic of only six (6) trips per day. Mr. Heilman replied in the affirmative and said he could back up what they were claiming. Chair Magnuson asked when the issue of the Variance became apparent, did they give any consideration to scaling back the size of the building so it would be more compatible with the FAR. Mr. Heilman replied that he could not make a project viable to meet the FAR; no matter what, he would have had to be here for a Variance on the FAR. Commissioner Corbett asked how long it would take to fill this facility or to become stable. Mr. Heilman replied that the pro-forma is roughly three years. However, their facilities in Blaine and Burnsville the lease up was less than two years. Mr. Heilman concluded by stating that the stormwater report obviously works for all of the regulations and they are not changing anything other than what is existing. They are maintaining the water on their site because of their development. Chair Magnuson opened the public hearing. Seeing no one coming forward wishing to speak, Chair Magnuson asked for a motion to close the public hearing. August 27, 2019 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 8 of 13 COMMISSIONER MAZZITELLO MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER NOONAN, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Chair Magnuson suggested that the Conditional Use Permit and the Variance be considered separately; and that the Variance be considered first. Commissioner Noonan agreed since the outcome of the decision on the Variance may necessitate modification to the plans under the Conditional Use Permit. Community Development Director Tim Benetti stated that if the Commission were to deny the Variance, technically they should deny the Conditional Use Permit because they are intertwined with each other. Commissioner Noonan replied that they could only deny the Variance. A CUP cannot be denied; it can only have conditions imposed upon it. Commissioner Noonan stated that if the Variance is denied, then the Commission could table the Conditional Use Permit. COMMISSIONER NOONAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL, TO RECOMMEND DENIAL OF PLANNING CASE 2019-20 VARIANCE BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT THAT CONFIRM THE APPLICANT FAILED TO MEET THE BURDEN(S) OF PROOF OR STANDARDS IN GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE REQUESTED HEREIN, NOTED AS FOLLOWS: A. Under Title 12-1L-5A of the City Code, the City may only grant Variances from the strict application of the provisions of the Code in cases where there are “practical difficulties” in carrying out the strict letter of the regulations of the Code. “Practical difficulties” consists of a three -part test: (i) the Applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not otherwise permitted by the Code; (ii) the plight of the Applicant is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the Applicant; and (iii) the Variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Economic considerations alone do not constitute “practical difficulties.” B. The City hereby determines the Applicant has not fully met the burden of demonstrating the requisite “practical difficulties” in order to justify the granting of this Variance to exceed the floor area ratio requirement of 0.5 for Industrial District uses; and therefore the City hereby finds the proposed personal self-storage project is not essential to the overall enjoyment and continued use of the property; and there are other alternatives on the property due to its large size; and is therefore not considered a reasonable use of the property. C. Because the City finds that the first prong of the three -part test (reasonable use of the property) is not met by the Applicant, the City need not consider the remaining two prongs of the test (unique circumstances of the property and essential character of the neighborhood). August 27, 2019 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 9 of 13 Commissioner Noonan added that he had considerable difficulty finding the ‘practical difficulty’ in this instance. The last comment of the applicant was quite telling; the only reason they were pursuing the floor area they had, and therefore the Variance, was because it did not work from an economic point of view. That is not a basis for approving a Variance. Either the city has a Zoning Ordinance or they do not, that applies across the board. He has sensitivity to the discussions on intensity but it is also massing as well. For the reasons being is that the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance are very clear and have been very clear from day 1. In this case of Variance of 1.25 he finds is beyond what is reasonable in this consideration. Commissioner Petschel stated that the argument that other cities do not have a similar requirement does not hold any water. It looks like fine project and he does not disagree with the project; however, the Commission cannot change the ordinance through a Variance. Especially since they have been nick picked in court over their own code and their own procedural application of that code. Given that there was not even an attempt to offer a practical difficulty other than they need this to make money, he could not support it. Chair Magnuson stated that she personally could see where this is one of those situations – it reminds her a little bit of schools in a residential zone where there is a requirement in place that seems to be perhaps no longer necessary or potentially outdated and that is creating a hang up. The fact of the matter is that it exists. She asked, time wise what would it take if there was any inclination to change that code to either modify the FAR or eliminate entirely, and would that pose a significant time problem for this application. Mr. Benetti replied that currently the applicant’s action deadline was set for October 6, 2019; they are still within the first 60-day rule under this application. It could be extended another 60 days or they could provide a letter stating that they waive the statutory review period. In the meantime, if they wish to come back and apply for an amendment to the code – they could easily come in and they would like to have the FAR restricted or they could amend their own CUP standards to allow for a higher FAR. Chair Magnuson stated that she would be more comfortable changing the code if the code needs to be changed, rather than trying to work around a long-standing standard by Variance. Commissioner Mazzitello agreed with Chair Magnuson’s comment about issuing Variances where the code if flawed; it would be better to amend/correct the flawed code. The FAR does not match up with the other requirements within the code. He then asked if there was a FAR standard in the Business District (no), is there one in the High-Density Residential District (no), so why is it here. His argument is that it either should not be here or it should be a number that is consistent with 50% lot coverage and a height of 30-45-feet. The FAR is inconsistent with the rest of the code. That is the practical difficulty. Therefore, he would not support the motion for denial. He would support either granting this Variance or a tabling so there could be a code amendment to change or eliminate the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) standard from the Industrial Zone. AYES: 3 (Noonan, Petschel, Magnuson) NAYS: 3 (Mazzitello, Corbett, Toth) ABSTAIN: 1 (Katz) August 27, 2019 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 10 of 13 COMMISSIONER MAZZITELLO MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CORBETT, TO TABLE THIS ENTIRE APPLICATION UNTIL THE SEPTEMBER 2019 MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, DURING WHICH TIME STAFF IS INSTRUCTED, OR THE APPLICANT IS INSTRUCTED, TO COME UP WITH A CODE AMENDMENT TO THE INDUSTRIAL ZONE CODE TO ALTER THE FLOOR AREA RATIO STANDARD AND REQUEST THE APPLICANT ENTERTAIN AN EXTENSION OR WAIVE THE STATUTORY REVIEW PERIOD AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 B) PLANNING CASE 2019-23 GARLAND’S INC. / JBT LLC, 2240 ENTERPRISE DRIVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT for OUTDOOR SALE LOT Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that Garland’s Inc. is purchasing the former Manna Freight property, located at 2440 Enterprise Drive. They wish to relocate their headquarters and their main distribution center. Garland’s Inc. is a distributor of pre-made casters, wheels, shelving units, hand-carts, and a wide variety of material handling products for commercial/industrial based businesses. They are requesting a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for an outdoor sales lot to display their very small box trailers, or job-site trailers. This would be under a new enclosed fenced-in area. This item was presented under a public hearing and notice was published in the local newspaper and notice letters were mailed to all surrounding property owners within 350-feet of the subject property. No comments of objections have been received. The property is zoned I-Industrial, is 3.33 acres in size, and contains a 31,320 square foot office/warehouse building. This office/warehouse building would become the new office/headquarters/distribution center for Garland’s Inc. The office space consists of two floors with 5,874 square feet on each level. The first floor office space would be used by 20 employees and the upstairs office space would be converted into a new showroom space. The back warehouse area is approximately 18,512 square feet in size. There are currently 62 parking spaces on the lot with seven (7) loading bays and one (1) at grade bay on the backside. The initial plan that was submitted by the applicant showed a new fence coming in off of the mid-point of the building and back to the rear property line. Storage of trailers would be on the outside. Mr. Benetti shared images showing the types of box trailers or job-site trailers that would be stored on the site. Garland’s Inc. does not manufacture the trailers, they broker them. The customer comes to them and asks for these type of trailers through direct sales or Internet sales. August 27, 2019 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 11 of 13 Open sales lots do require a CUP and are defined as “land devoted to the display of goods for sale, rent, lease, or trade where such goods are not enclosed within a building”. Garland’s Inc. plans to utilize only the rear portion of the property for the storage/display of the trailers. Staff raised the question early on if these trailers constituted a “vehicle” under this land use category. After discussing this question with the Police Department and researching definitions under the Minnesota State Statues, they discovered that a ‘trailer’ on its own is not considered a ‘vehicle of transportation’ as it does not have the capability to move or travel on its own power. The applicant did share with staff images of fencing on the front of the site; however, Mr. Benetti would like to see fencing on the northwest side as well and asked for the Commission’s opinion on that. The rear of the property does contain an old railroad right-of-way bed that has been vacant for a number of years. It is also heavily landscaped on the opposite site. There may not be any need for screening; however, for security reasons fencing should be considered. Again, Mr. Benetti reviewed the criteria to be met in the granting of a CUP (Title 12-1L-6): a. Not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the community b. Nor will cause serious traffic congestion nor hazards c. Nor will seriously depreciate surrounding property value, and d. That the same is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this chapter and the comprehensive plan Commissioner Noonan noted that Condition 2 recommended all new fencing be black vinyl coated chain-linked fencing; yet the images shared were board-on-board. Mr. Benetti replied that he believed the board-on-board would be too much for the front edge; he believed the black chain- link fencing would probably work better. He recommended that the whole fencing area be replaced with the black chain-link fencing with decorative (insertable) slats. Commissioner Mazzitello, referring to the fencing ordinance code amendment recently passed, asked if the city requires fencing on industrial lots. Mr. Benetti replied in the negative; only if they are adjacent to residential are they required to have fencing. Mr. Bob Smith, one of three brothers that own Garland’s Inc., came forward. He stated that Garland’s Inc. is currently headquartered in Minneapolis, with locations in Minneapolis; Burnsville; Des Moines, IA; Denver, CO; and Green Bay, WI. They are one of the top five distributors of material handling products in the United States; they are very good at what they do. They believe it would be a very good addition to their company to move to Mendota Heights. Commissioner Toth noted that he looked at their website and it did not identify trailer sales as of yet. He asked if this was a new entity that they are building into their market, building into Mendota Heights. Mr. Smith replied that this is a new product line and they feel that it will add to their current product line. Commissioner Toth then asked if they would be selling used trailers or could a potential buyer trade-in their old trailer for a new one. Mr. Smith replied that they are not planning on doing that; their focus is on selling of new trailers. Their emphasis is to not sell junk; there would not be piles of junk in their yard. August 27, 2019 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 12 of 13 Commissioner Corbett asked if the two runs of fencing that was included in their original proposal and not as a recommendation, was that born from them or born from their work with the city. Mr. Smith replied that they asked the city what they thought and they thought it would be a good idea to fence in the front and the sides. Commissioner Corbett asked if they had a genuine security concern. Mr. Smith replied that security is a concern. The backside is all wooded so they assumed a fence would not be necessary. The missing fencing on the west side was because he simply forgot to put it in there. They would be more than willing to put a fence there is the city believed it would be a good recommendation. Commissioner Mazzitello asked for confirmation that if someone wanted to steal a trailer, the only logical way they are going to get it out is through a locked gate. Mr. Smith confirmed. The back wooded area is heavily overgrown and would be very difficult for anyone to even walk back there. Chair Magnuson asked how they would feel about putting a fence back there. Mr. Smith replied that if the Commission and staff recommended it, they would do it. Chair Magnuson opened the public hearing. Seeing no one coming forward wishing to speak, Chair Magnuson asked for a motion to close the public hearing. COMMISSIONER MAZZITELLO MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER TOTH, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 COMMISSIONER MAZZITELLO MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER NOONAN, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING CASE 2019-23 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BASED ON THE FINDINGS OF FACT THAT THE PROPOSED PROJECT COMPLIES WITH THE POLICIES AND STANDARDS OF THE CITY CODE AND IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. The parking and display of any new trailers at this location will be confined only to the fenced-in area and in the space(s) noted on the Site Plan submitted under Planning Application No. 2019-23 and presented in this Planning Report. No trailers will be allowed to be stored at any time outside the fenced-in lot or any unpaved (grass) areas of the subject property. 2. All new fencing shall be black vinyl coated chain-linked fencing, with decorative inserts for added screening measures, and must be a minimum of 6-feet in height at all locations. 3. The Applicant shall provide additional fencing along the northwest corner and along the north (back) line of the property. 4. A fence permit shall be required for the installation of the new fence. 5. Any new sign(s) proposed under this development plan must meet the standards of City Code Title 12-1D-15: Signs. No temporary signs, special sales event signs, flags, balloons, August 27, 2019 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting – DRAFT Page 13 of 13 pennants or similar attention attracting devices will be allowed or permitted for the promotion, advertisement, or sale of trailers at this location. 6. The Applicant agrees to install a “Knox-box” or similar key/switch feature for fire and police emergency access on the outside of the gate/fence area. AND THE ADDED CONDITION: 7. The site be enclosed with screening fencing. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Chair Magnuson advised the City Council would consider this application at its September 3, 2019 meeting. Staff Announcements / Updates Community Development Director Tim Benetti gave the following verbal review: Planning Case 2019-21 Andy & Natalie Hunter, 1175 Orchard Place Critical Area Permit Approved by the City Council as recommended by the Planning Commission Planning Case 2019-22 Tim & Jessica Carlson, 2319 Swan Drive Conditional Use Permit Approved by the City Council as recommended by the Planning Commission Besides the Metro Storage application, next month the Planning Commission will be reviewing and application from ISD #197 - Somerset Elementary for a Variance - added building height. Chair Magnuson asked for a status update on the ordinance changes for schools located in residentially zoned areas. Mr. Benetti replied that the 2040 Comprehensive Plan needs to be adopted first. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan is still in the jurisdictional review period. Staff has heard from four or five of the jurisdictional (there are 22) and will be sending out reminders for soon, even if the response is ‘no comment’. The 6-month review period ends December 11, 2019. Adjournment COMMISSIONER MAZZITELLO MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER NOONAN, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 8:28 P.M. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Planning Report-Case #2019-25 Page 1 Planning Staff Report DATE: September 24, 2019 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Tim Benetti, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Planning Case 2019-25 VARIANCE APPLICANT: ISD #197 – Somerset Elementary School PROPERTY ADDRESS: 1355 Dodd Road ZONING/GUIDED: R-1 One Family Residential / S-School (Institutional) ACTION DEADLINE: October 26, 2019 INTRODUCTION ISD #197 is seeking to construct three (3) new additions to the existing Somerset Elementary School. One of these additions is a gymnasium addition, which requires a variance from the maximum height standards for structures in the R-1 One Family Residential District. This legal notice of this public hearing was published in the Pioneer Press; and notice letters were mailed to all properties within 750-feet (instead of the standard 350-ft.), which is consistent with past notices mailed out on other school district related projects. The city has not received any letters of opposition or objection, but does note one objection from the immediate neighbor to the north, due to perceived visual and light impacts on their own property. No other comments or objections were received. BACKGROUND The subject property generally located on the north end of the city, near the intersection of Dodd Road and Emerson Avenue. The school is located in the R-1 One Family Residential zone, and guided for S-School (Institutional) use. The subject parcel consists of approximately 9.3 acres of land area, and contains a one and two-story, 33,194-sq. ft. school facility, with visitor/staff parking lot, bus/delivery service areas, with a playground and small ball field located in the back of the school (see image –right and next page - below). Planning Report-Case #2019-25 Page 2 The original school house was built in 1936.; and the addition to the rear of the original school house was completed in 1953; followed by another larger expansion in 1969. In May of 2018, the voters in ISD #197 approved a $117 million building bond for structural and mechanical maintenance upgrades at all the district’s school buildings, which included modernizing outdated classroom and education spaces, improving fine arts and athletics spaces and addressing school parking lot safety and handicapped accessibility. SITE PLAN ISD-197 intends to construct three additions, as shown in the image below (red shaded areas): Planning Report-Case #2019-25 Page 3 The first improvement is a small, elevator addition, which is not subject to a variance, located in the area behind and between the original school house and the 1953 addition of the school (see image- below): The second is a new classroom addition off the back side of the school, which meets the 25-ft. height limitations, and is also not subject to the variance request (see image-below): The third and largest of the new additions is the new 56’ x 86’ (approx.) gymnasium addition, which scheduled to be added to the existing school gymnasium/cafeteria space off the north side of the school. This addition is shown with a 30-ft. height on the east (front) and north (side) elevations, and a 41-ft. height from the back side. As was the case with Friendly Hills Middle School project, the District is also seeking to reconfigure and improve the school’s bus drop-off and visitor/staff parking lot areas (shown in red-dashed outline – image right). Currently, the parking is one large combined area, with regular vehicle and bus parking striped out in the front lot area, and regular vehicle in the north parking area. The new plan now calls for the parking to be split or separated into two areas: the front lot will be re-striped and Planning Report-Case #2019-25 Page 4 reserved for student drop-off and visitor/staff parking only; while the north parking will be reconfigured with a turn-around section for bus drop-off and limited number of regular vehicle parking spaces, which will likely be available throughout the school hours when not being used/occupied by school buses. (Refer to Main Site Plan – above). Applicants have also provided a new landscape plan that includes new landscaping materials near the north edge of the expanded bus parking/turn around lot. The landscaping will be used to help screen or lessen any visual impacts of buses entering/exiting this area, or temporarily parking. ANALYSIS  Variance The R-1 Zone requires all structures to have no more than 25-feet in height. Flat-roofed structures such as these are measured at the upper-most edge of the building. The existing gymnasium addition is shown with a 27-foot building height. Search of city records indicate a CUP and Wetlands Permit for grading and playground work was approved in 2005; followed by a CUP for Fill and a Variance for reduced parking lot setbacks in 2006. There does not appear to be any variance granted for the added two-feet in height for the existing gym section. The new gymnasium addition will exceed the 25-foot maximum height standard for the R-1 Zone by five (5) additional feet, for total front (measured) elevation height of 30-feet. Although the elevation plans submitted by the District’s architect indicates a 41-ft. height off the back side, City Code defines or prescribes the measurement of all buildings as: “The vertical distance from the average grade of the front building line, as established in the approved grading plan for the lot, to the top of the cornice of a flat roof.” So although the back side of the new gym is well over the 25-foot maximum height standard, the variance requested only applies to the 30-foot vertical measurement at the front building elevation. When considering variances, the City is required to consider an Applicant’s response to certain questions, and carefully weigh certain findings as they apply to these standards. As part of the variance application, Applicants are required to prepare and submit their own responses and findings, which for this case, are noted below (in italic text): 1. Is this request in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance and comprehensive plan; and are there any “practical difficulties” in connection with the variance; meaning does the property owner propose to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this chapter? “The height of the new building additions proposed for Somerset Elementary School are all shorter than the existing bell tower structure of the existing school. The existing bell tower structure is approximately 46’-0” above the main level finished floor elevation. The new class room building additions is 14’-0” above the main level finished floor elevation.” Staff’s response: The use of the property as a public school is a permitted use in the R-1 District, and its continued use as a school, even with the additional gym space, is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the overall Zoning Ordinance. The applicant’s desire to construct an addition to the current gym facility is reasonable. 2. Due to the nature of this variance request, is the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner? . “The granting of this variance is consistent with the current circumstance unique to the existing property, that allows for a school to exist within this Zoning District.” Staff’s response: One of the primary reasons for this recent school bond approval, was to provide upgrades and additional space for the students that utilize these local schools, and provide effective Planning Report-Case #2019-25 Page 5 levels of service and spaces for the students. The plight of the landowner and restrictions on building heights is due to circumstances unique to the property, as this school use is not a typical single-family use in the underlying R-1 One Family Residential District. Therefore, granting a variance is warranted. 3. Would the variance, if granted, alter the essential character of the neighborhood? “The height of the proposed Somerset Elementary School building addition are less than the current height of the existing elementary school. The iconic existing bell tower continues to be the focal point (tallest structure) for Somerset Elementary School.” Staff’s response: The variances, if granted, should not alter the essential character of the neighborhoods, as this school has been in place and operation for a number of years in the community, and there is a general expectation that any addition of this nature can be considered a reasonable improvement to the overall functionality, benefit and enjoyment of the school, including its students, faculty, and the community. ALTERNATIVES Following a public hearing, the Planning Commission may consider one of the following actions: 1. Recommend approval of the variance to exceed the R-1 District’s 25-ft. maximum allowable height standard by 5-ft. (30-ft. total) for the new gymnasium structure, based on attached findings of facts for approval with certain conditions; or 2. Recommend denial of the variance to exceed the R-1 District’s 25-ft. maximum allowable height standard, based on amended findings of facts for denial, which must be formulated by the Commission; or 3. TABLE the request; direct city staff to explore other alternatives with the Applicant and provide follow-up information; and extend the review period an additional 60-days in compliance with Minnesota State Statute. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the variance requests, based on the attached findings of fact, with the following conditions (Alternative #1): 1. The Applicant shall obtain all necessary building permit for the new structure identified herein, including any fences or electrical permits as necessary. 2. All grading and construction activity will be in compliance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations and codes, as well as in compliance with the City’s Land Disturbance Guidance Document. MATERIALS INCLUDED FOR REVIEW 1. Aerial site map 2. Planning Application, including Narrative 3. Building Addition Elevation Plans 4. Site & Landscape Plans Planning Report-Case #2019-25 Page 6 FINDINGS OF FACT FOR APPROVAL Variance Application Somerset Elementary School – 1355 Dodd Road Planning Case No. 2019-25 The following Findings of Fact are made in support of approval of the proposed variance request: 1. The scale and scope of the variance needed to justify and approve the extended height of the proposed gym addition structure are considered consistent with the spirit and intent of the City Code and Comprehensive Plan for the community, and may be approved as presented. 2. The Applicant has proven or demonstrated a practical difficulty or reasonableness in this case for granting of a variance to exceed the 25-ft. maximum height of structures in the underlying R-1 Zone; and it is recognized the new gymnasium height is less than what exists today with the bell towner on the original school house building. 3. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property, as this school use is not a typical single-family use in the underlying R-1 One Family Residential District, and therefore warrants approval or granting of said variance. 4. The variances, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhoods; since the school is and has been in place and operation for a number of years in the community, and there is a general accepted expectation that this gym addition improvement can be considered a reasonable improvement for the overall benefit and enjoyment of the school, its students, faculty, and the community. 2019-25300.00500.0008/27/201910/26/2019 2019-25ISD #197-Somerset Elem.1355 Dodd Road Somerset Elementary School West St. Paul - Mendota Heights - Eagan Area Schools (District 197) » News and Events » Facilities Design & Construction » Somerset Elementary School Thanks to the support of voters, Somerset Elementary School is in the process of making renovations and repairs to its facility. We will update this page weekly as construction progresses. UPDATE FOR AUGUST 13, 2019 Completed for week ending August 9, 2019 • Project is in Design Development Phase. • Weekly design meetings being held at LSE Architects. • Solutions to the 1936 additions entry addition roofing are being explored. BUILDING PROJECTS Academic and Program Improvements • Sitework includes separating bus and parent drop-off/pick-up • Handicapped accessibility improvements • Rightsized kindergarten classrooms to meet state guidelines • Create collaboration/small-group commons for grades 1-2 • Two-story addition for classrooms and collaboration space • Renovation to provide handicapped access to 1936 structure • Creation of dedicated gymnasium space • Renovations to improve kitchen and serving area • Repurpose space for lab Building Maintenance Improvements • Site improvements include drainage, concrete and retaining wall • Exterior improvements include tuck pointing, sealants and painting • Interior finishes include doors, lockers, flooring, and gym equipment • Electrical improvements include lighting, PA system, and fire alarm system PROJECT TIMELINE • Design and Planning: March 2019-October 2019 • Construction Phase: April 2020-August 2021 • Construction - Exterior Additions: Last Spring-Summer 2020, Summer 2021 • Construction - Interior Renovations: Summer 2020, 2021 • Completion: Late August 2021 DODD RD1ST AVE LAURA ST2ND AVE 3RD AVESY LVANDALE RDSOMERSET RDEMERSON AVE IVY FALLS AVE DORSET RDCOLESHIRE LN STAPLES AVE SUNSET LN MEARS AVE BROOK SIDE LN VANDALL STLAURA CT City of Mendota Heights0410 SCALE IN FEETDate: 9/17/2019 GIS Map Disclaimer:This data is for informational purposes only and should not be substituted for a true title search, property appraisal, plat,survey, or for zoning verification. The City of Mendota Heights assumes no legal responsibility for the information containedin this data. The City of Mendota Heights, or any other entity from which data was obtained, assumes no liability for any errorsor omissions herein. If discrepancies are found, please contact the City of Mendota Heights. Contact "Gopher State One Call" at 651-454-0002 for utility locations, 48 hours prior to any excavation. SOMERSET ELEMENTARY 1355 DODD ROAD VARIANCE SITE PLAN Somerset Elementary School Schematic Design RETAINING WALL REMOVE/ RECONSTRUCT RETAINING WALL (BIG BLOCK) AND FENCE (ALTERNATE No. 12) NEW 10' WIDE ADA TRAIL/ FIRE LANE NEW BUS CORRAL (6)/ NEW TRASH ENCLOSURE HARD SURFACE PLAY/ PARKING (24+1 HC STALLS) EXISTING STUDENT NEW FIRE HYDRANT DROP-OFF (~22) AND PARKING (32+2 HC STALLS) SOUTH PARKING (EXISTING, 13+1 HC STALLS) EMERSON AVENUESTUDENT DROP-OFFDODD ROADEXISTING CURB CUT EXISTING CURB CUT RE-STRIPE EXISTING PARKING LOT NEW CONCRETE WALK NEW CONCRETE WALK NEW CONCRETE WALK 0 15 30 BUS CORRAL (6)/HARD SURFACEPLAY/ PARKING(24+1 HC STALLS)RETAINING WALLSTUDENTDROP-OFF (~22)AND PARKING(37+2 HC STALLS)SOUTH PARKING(EXISTING, 7+1 HCSTALLS)REMOVE ASPHALT,REGRADE, CONSTRUCT NEWHEAVY-DUTY PAVEMENT(FOR ADA ACCESS)REMOVE/ RECONSTRUCTRETAINING WALL (BIGBLOCK) AND FENCE(ALTERNATE No. 12)74.99'SETBACK258.28' SETBACK123.60' SETBACK46.79'SETBACK166.44' SETBACK362.61' SETBACK353.22' SETBACK269.64' SETBACK6.09'ProjectDateDrawn byChecked byDrawing NumberNo.DateKey PlanLSE ARCHITECTS, INC.100 Portland Ave. South, Suite 100Minneapolis, MN 55401612.343.1010 office612.3382280 faxwww.lse-architects.comThese drawings including all design, details, specificationsand information, are the sole copyright of LSE Architects,Inc. and are for use on this specific project and shall notbe used on any other work without agreement and writtenSHUPLVVLRQRI/6($UFKLWHFWV,QF‹LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SITE PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING7575 GOLDEN VALLEY ROAD SUITE 200 MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55427FAX (763) 544-0531 PH (763) 544-7129SOMERSETELEMENTARYSCHOOLSomerset Elementary School1355 Dodd RoadMendota Heights, MN 55118West St. Paul-Mendota Hts.-Eagan School District - ISD #197THE PROPERTY IS ZONED R-1 - One Family ResidentialEXISTING PARKING:72 + 3 HC STALLSPARKING REQUIREMENT:ONE (1) SPACE FOR EACH FULL-TIME EMPLOYEE (34 staff):44 SPACES REQ'D (10 interim staff)PROPOSED PARKING COUNTS:STAFF, VISITOR, PUBLIC/ VOLUNTEER PARKING = ~68 + 4 HC STALLSBUS PARKING = 6 Large/ x SPED/ x Vans NeededSITE STATISTICS:01530NOT FOR CONSTRUCT ION06.21.19DESIGN DEVELOP.NOTES:1.REFER TO SHEET C1.41 - GRADING, DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN FOR GENERALNOTES.2.ALL APPLICABLE DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF CURB, EDGE OF PAVEMENT, OR PROPERTYLINE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.3. CHECK ALL PLAN AND DETAIL DIMENSIONS AND VERIFY SAME BEFORE FIELD LAYOUT.4.SIGNAGE SHALL BE INSTALLED 18" BEHIND THE BACK OF CURB OR EDGE OF PAVEMENT.LEGENDBASELINE FOR DIMENSIONSPOINT OF INTERSECTIONBUILDING STOOP - REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL PLANSPROPERTY LINEPI 90.8M.E.(24.2)13.813.825.825.824.825.824.624.625.025.324.1BUS CORRAL (6)/HARD SURFACEPLAY/ PARKING(24+1 HC STALLS)25.8RETAINING WALLSTUDENTDROP-OFF (~22)AND PARKING(37+2 HC STALLS)M.E.(27.9)SOUTH PARKING(EXISTING, 7+1 HCSTALLS)25.626.026.226.726.526.5M.E.(26.2)26.827.3M.E.(28.5)REMOVE ASPHALT,REGRADE, CONSTRUCT NEWHEAVY-DUTY PAVEMENT(FOR ADA ACCESS)REMOVE/ RECONSTRUCTRETAINING WALL (BIGBLOCK) AND FENCE(ALTERNATE No. 12)13.813.814.325.325.4911 912 913 91491892 3 92 5 925 926 927 927 931 933931 93392992792892620.5 / 19.818.0 / 15.033.0 / 28.729.5 / 26.533.0 / 30.037.0 / 33.039.5 / 37.5914916918921923M.E.(13.8)M.E.(14.0)14.313.613.8ProjectDateDrawn byChecked byDrawing NumberNo.DateKey PlanLSE ARCHITECTS, INC.100 Portland Ave. South, Suite 100Minneapolis, MN 55401612.343.1010 office612.3382280 faxwww.lse-architects.comThese drawings including all design, details, specificationsand information, are the sole copyright of LSE Architects,Inc. and are for use on this specific project and shall notbe used on any other work without agreement and writtenSHUPLVVLRQRI/6($UFKLWHFWV,QF‹LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SITE PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING7575 GOLDEN VALLEY ROAD SUITE 200 MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55427FAX (763) 544-0531 PH (763) 544-7129SOMERSETELEMENTARYSCHOOL01530GENERAL NOTES1.ALL CONSTRUCTION MUST COMPLY WITH APPLICABLE STATE AND LOCAL ORDINANCES.2.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR AND SHALL PAY FOR ALL CONSTRUCTION STAKING /LAYOUT.3.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN AND PAY FOR ALL RELATED CONSTRUCTION PERMITS, INCLUDING THENPDES PERMIT FROM THE MPCA. SUBMIT A COPY OF ALL PERMITS TO THE CITY.4.CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAGE (CONSTRUCTION ZONES)NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS. ALL SIGNAGE LAYOUTS MUST BE DESIGNED BYTHE CONTRACTOR AND APPROVED BY LOCAL AUTHORITIES.5.INSTALL CONTROL FENCING AND BARRICADING AS NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC.6.INSPECT SITE AND REVIEW SOIL BORINGS TO DETERMINE EXTENT OF WORK AND NATURE OF MATERIALS TOBE HANDLED.7.REFER TO SPECIFICATIONS FOR DEWATERING REQUIREMENTS.8.CHECK ALL PLAN AND DETAIL DIMENSIONS AND VERIFY SAME BEFORE FIELD LAYOUT.9.REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR BUILDING AND STOOP DIMENSIONS AND LAYOUT.10.MAINTAIN ADJACENT PROPERTY AND PUBLIC STREETS CLEAN FROM CONSTRUCTION CAUSED DIRT ANDDEBRIS ON A DAILY BASIS. PROTECT DRAINAGE SYSTEMS FROM SEDIMENTATION AS A RESULT OFCONSTRUCTION RELATED DIRT AND DEBRIS.11.MAINTAIN DUST CONTROL DURING GRADING OPERATIONS.12.ALL EROSION CONTROL METHODS SHALL COMPLY WITH MPCA AND LOCAL REGULATIONS.13.CONTRACTOR SHALL MINIMIZE DISTURBANCE TO SITE AND PROTECT EXISTING SITE FEATURES (INCLUDINGTURF AND VEGETATION) WHICH ARE TO REMAIN.14.PROPOSED CONTOURS AND SPOT ELEVATIONS ARE SHOWN TO FINISH GRADE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.15.PROPOSED ELEVATIONS SHOWN TYPICALLY AS 49.1 OR 49 SHALL BE UNDERSTOOD TO MEAN 1049.1 OR 1049.16.SPOT ELEVATIONS SHOWN IN PARKING LOTS, DRIVES AND ROADS INDICATE GUTTER GRADES, UNLESSNOTED OTHERWISE. SPOT ELEVATIONS WITH LABELS OUTSIDE THE BUILDING PERIMETER INDICATEPROPOSED GRADES OUTSIDE THE BUILDING. SPOT ELEVATIONS WITH LABELS INSIDE THE BUILDINGPERIMETER INDICATE PROPOSED FINISH FLOOR ELEVATIONS.17.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR DETERMINING QUANTITIES OF CUT, FILL AND WASTEMATERIALS TO BE HANDLED, AND FOR AMOUNT OF GRADING TO BE DONE IN ORDER TO COMPLETELY3(5)250$//:25.,1',&$7('217+('5$:,1*6,0325768,7$%/(0$7(5,$/$1'(;32578168,7$%/((;&(66:$67(0$7(5,$/$65(48,5('$//&2676$662&,$7(':,7+,03257,1*$1'(;3257,1*MATERIALS SHALL BE INCIDENTAL TO THE CONTRACT.18.NO FINISHED SLOPES SHALL EXCEED 4' HORIZONTAL TO 1' VERTICAL (4:1), UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.19.ALL DISTURBED AREAS OUTSIDE THE BUILDING PAD WHICH ARE NOT DESIGNATED TO BE PAVED SHALLRECEIVE AT LEAST 6" OF TOPSOIL AND SHALL BE SEEDED OR SODDED. REFER TO SHEET L1.11 -LANDSCAPING PLAN FOR SEED AND SOD LOCATIONS.20.WHERE NEW SOD MEETS EXISTING SOD, EXISTING SOD EDGE SHALL BE CUT TO ALLOW FOR A CONSISTENT,UNIFORM STRAIGHT EDGE. JAGGED OR UNEVEN EDGES WILL NOT BE ACCEPTABLE. REMOVE TOPSOIL ATJOINT BETWEEN EXISTING AND NEW AS REQUIRED TO ALLOW NEW SOD SURFACE TO BE FLUSH WITHEXISTING.21.FAILURE OF TURF DEVELOPMENT: IN THE EVENT THE CONTRACTOR FAILS TO PROVIDE AN ACCEPTABLETURF, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL RE-SEED OR RE-SOD ALL APPLICABLE AREAS, AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TOTHE OWNER, TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE ENGINEER.22.ANY MANHOLE, CATCH BASIN, STORM SEWER, SANITARY SEWER, DRAINTILE OR OTHER POTENTIAL SOURCEFOR CONTAMINATION SHALL BE INSTALLED AT LEAST 10 FEET HORIZONTALLY FROM ANY WATERMAIN PERMINNESOTA PLUMBING CODE. THIS ISOLATION DISTANCE SHALL BE MEASURED FROM THE OUTER EDGE OFTHE PIPE TO THE OUTER EDGE OF THE CONTAMINATION SOURCE (OUTER EDGE OF STRUCTURES OR PIPINGOR SIMILAR).23.LOCATE ALL EXISTING UTILITIES, VERIFY LOCATION, SIZE AND INVERT ELEVATION OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES.VERIFY LOCATIONS, SIZES AND ELEVATIONS OF SAME BEFORE BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION.24.CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN DRAINAGE FROM EXISTING BUILDING AT ALL TIMES. PROVIDE TEMPORARYSTORM SEWER (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, CATCH BASINS, MANHOLES, PIPING, ETC.) AS REQUIRED.EXISTING STORM SEWER SHALL NOT BE REMOVED UNTIL TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT STORM SEWER ISINSTALLED AND FUNCTIONAL. COORDINATE ALL REMOVALS WITH APPROPRIATE TRADES (SITE UTILITYCONTRACTOR, MECHANICAL CONTRACTOR, ETC.) AS REQUIRED.LEGENDREFERENCE KEY TO SITE DETAILS DETAIL I.D NUMBER (TOP) DETAIL SHEET NUMBER (BOTTOM)EXISTING CONTOUREXISTING SPOT ELEVATIONPROPOSED CONTOURPROPOSED SPOT ELEVATIONME = MATCH EXISTINGAPPROXIMATE SOIL BORING LOCATIONPROPOSED MANHOLE (MH)PROPOSED CATCH BASIN (CB)PROPOSED BUILDING STOOP - REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL PLANSPROPOSED SCOUR STOP - REFER TO SPECSLIMITS OF SAND FILTRATION AREAPROPERTY LINE104049.61C2.1112C2.1113C2.11NOT FOR CONSTRUCT ION06.21.19DESIGN DEVELOP. BUS CORRAL (6)/HARD SURFACEPLAY/ PARKING(24+1 HC STALLS)RETAINING WALLSTUDENTDROP-OFF (~22)AND PARKING(32+2 HC STALLS)SOUTH PARKING(EXISTING, 13+1 HCSTALLS)REMOVE ASPHALT,REGRADE, CONSTRUCT NEWHEAVY-DUTY PAVEMENT(FOR ADA ACCESS)REMOVE/ RECONSTRUCTRETAINING WALL (BIGBLOCK) AND FENCE(ALTERNATE No. 12)911 912 913 91491892 3 92 5 925 926 927 931 933931 93392992792892691491691892192310' WIDE ADATRAIL/ FIRE LANE1PDG2SM1PS6FP2PC1PDG1PDG1PP1PPEXISTING 33" MAPLE (PROTECT)EXISTING 24" SPRUCE (PROTECT)EXISTING 25" PINE (PROTECT)ProjectDateDrawn byChecked byDrawing NumberNo.DateKey PlanLSE ARCHITECTS, INC.100 Portland Ave. South, Suite 100Minneapolis, MN 55401612.343.1010 office612.3382280 faxwww.lse-architects.comThese drawings including all design, details, specificationsand information, are the sole copyright of LSE Architects,Inc. and are for use on this specific project and shall notbe used on any other work without agreement and writtenSHUPLVVLRQRI/6($UFKLWHFWV,QF‹LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SITE PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING7575 GOLDEN VALLEY ROAD SUITE 200 MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55427FAX (763) 544-0531 PH (763) 544-7129SOMERSETELEMENTARYSCHOOL01530NOT FOR CONSTRUCT ION06.21.19DESIGN DEVELOP.LEGENDREFERENCE KEY TO SITE DETAILS DETAIL I.D NUMBER (TOP) DETAIL SHEET NUMBER (BOTTOM)PROPOSED DECIDUOUS TREEPROPOSED CONIFEROUS TREEPROPOSED SHRUBSPROPOSED SHRUB / MULCH BEDPLANT KEY (REFER TO PLANT SCHEDULE ABOVE)TOP = QUANTITYBOTTOM = PLANT SYMBOL1C2.1215C2.1216C2.1217C2.1218C2.12NOTES:1.REFER TO SHEET C1.41- GRADING, DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN, FORGENERAL NOTES.2.LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT MUST INSPECT AND APPROVE FINISH GRADING BEFORECONTRACTOR PROCEEDS WITH SODDING.3.ALL DISTURBED AREAS OUTSIDE THE BUILDING PAD WHICH ARE NOT DESIGNATED TO BEPAVED SHALL RECEIVE AT LEAST 6" OF TOPSOIL AND SHALL BE SEEDED OR SODDED.4.WHERE NEW SOD MEETS EXISTING TURF, EXISTING TURF EDGE SHALL BE CUT TO ALLOWFOR A CONSISTENT, UNIFORM STRAIGHT EDGE. JAGGED OR UNEVEN EDGES WILL NOT BEACCEPTABLE. REMOVE TOPSOIL AT JOINT BETWEEN EXISTING AND NEW AS REQUIREDTO ALLOW NEW SOD SURFACE TO BE FLUSH WITH EXISTING.5. FAILURE OF TURF DEVELOPMENT: IN THE EVENT THE CONTRACTOR FAILS TO PROVIDE ANACCEPTABLE TURF, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL RE-SEED OR RE-SOD ALL APPLICABLEAREAS, AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER, TO THE SATISFACTION OF THELANDSCAPE ARCHITECT.6.BEGIN TURF ESTABLISHMENT IMMEDIATELY AFTER SODDING, REFER TO SPECIFICATIONFOR PROCEDURE.7.ALL TREES TO BE BALLED AND BURLAPPED.8.ALL TREES AND SHRUBS SHALL RECEIVE 4" DEPTH OF CLEAN SHREDDED HARDWOODMULCH, UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED.9.ALL PLANT MATERIALS SHALL BE NO. 1 QUALITY, NURSERY GROWN AND SPECIMENSMUST BE MATCHED. ALL OVERSTORY TREES ADJACENT TO DRIVE AND WALKS SHALLBEGIN BRANCHING NO LOWER THAN 6'.5FP Planning Staff Report DATE: September 24, 2019 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Tim Benetti, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Planning Case 2019-26 CRITICAL AREA PERMIT APPLICANT: Matt Mosvick PROPERTY ADDRESS: 1135 Orchard Place ZONING/GUIDED: R-1 One Family Residential/LR Low Density Residential ACTION DEADLINE: October 28, 2019 INTRODUCTION The Applicants is seeking a Critical Area Permit to construct a new single family dwelling, located at 1135 Orchard Place. Since the property is situated in the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area, Zoning Code Section 12-3-5 requires a critical area permit for all major development activities requiring a building permit or special zoning approval. This item is being presented under a duly noticed public hearing process. A notice of hearing was published in the Pioneer Press; and notice letters were mailed to all owners within 350-feet of the subject property. The city has not received any objection or comments related to this application. BACKGROUND The subject site is generally located in the mid-block between Lexington Avenue and Orchard Circle. Planning Report-Case #2019-26 (M. Mosvick) Page 2 This new lot was created under a lot split application approved by the City Council on June 4, 2019 (Res. No. 2019-42). Mr. Mosvick split his mother’s property next door at 1133 Orchard Place, and is now requesting this permit to build a new home for his own family on the newly created parcel. The plan calls for a new 4,650-sf. single family dwelling, with an attached three-car garage (see front elevation image – below). The survey site plan calls for the home to have a setback of 57.0 feet (measured from the newly desiccated 30-ft. ROW easement off Orchard Place). This increased setback is an average setback determined between his mother’s home to the east and the separate residence to the west. Side yard setbacks will be 16.5-ft. on each side, and a rear yard setback of approximately 48-ft. (from new deck edge). Planning Report-Case #2019-26 (M. Mosvick) Page 3 ANALYSIS According to Title 12-3-2 of the City Code, the purpose and intent of the Critical Area Overlay District is: …to prevent and mitigate irreversible damage to this unique state, local, regional and national resource to promote orderly development of the residential, commercial, industrial, recreational and public areas, to preserve and enhance its values to the public and protect and preserve the system as an essential element in the city's transportation, sewer and water and recreational systems… The pertinent provisions of the Critical Area Overlay District that apply to this application are: Section 12-3-5. Site Plan Requirements: A: Site Plan Required: No building permit, zoning approval, or subdivision approval permit or certificate shall be issued for any action or development located in an area covered by this chapter until a site plan has been prepared and approved in accordance with the provisions of this chapter. Section 12-3-8: Development Standards: A. Objectives: The objectives of dimensional standards are to maintain the aesthetic integrity and natural environment of the Mississippi River corridor critical area. These standards are designed to protect and enhance the shoreline and bluff areas, as well as provide sufficient setback for on- site sanitary facilities, to prevent erosion of bluffs, to minimize flood damage and to prevent B. Structure Setbacks: All new structures shall meet the following minimum setbacks: 1. Setback from Bluff Line: No structure shall be constructed less than forty feet (40') landward from the bluff line of the river. 2. Setback from Normal High Water Mark: No structure or road shall be constructed less than one hundred feet (100') from the normal high water mark of any water body. The new home will be situated approx. 1,240 feet from the edge of the Mississippi River; and there are no bluffs or bluff lines identified on the subject property. The construction of this new residential dwelling will comply with all standards and regulations of the Zoning Ordinance. The Applicant must demonstrate the development of this site will not impact neighboring residential properties, and must ensure that proper and positive drainage is maintained during and after construction of the new home. For all intents and purposes, construction of this new dwelling should have little, if any effect upon the existing Mississippi Critical Area or the surrounding neighborhood environment. INTERAGENCY REVIEW In addition to the public and private property owners within 350 feet of the subject parcel, public hearing notices and application materials were sent to the following agencies for review and comment: Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MNDNR) • Acknowledged receipt of the application; no objections to this development request. Planning Report-Case #2019-26 (M. Mosvick) Page 4 ALTERNATIVES 1. Approve the Critical Area Permit request for 1135 Orchard Place, which would allow the construction of a new single-family dwelling, based on the findings of fact that the proposed project is compliant with the policies and standards of the Critical Area Overlay District, with certain conditions; or 2. Deny the Critical Area Permit request for 1135 Orchard Place, based on the findings of fact that the application does not meet certain policies and standards of the Critical Area Overlay District as determined by the Planning Commission; or 3. Table the request; direct staff to work with the Applicants and allow them more time to refine the site plans for the property, and extend the application review period an additional 60 days, in compliance with MN STAT. 15.99. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the Critical Area Permit request for 1135 Orchard Place, which would allow the construction of a new single-family residential dwelling, based on the findings of fact that the proposed project is compliant with the policies and standards of the Critical Area Overlay District, and with the following conditions: 1. A building permit, including all new grading and drainage work, must be approved by the City of Mendota Heights prior to the commencement of any new construction work. 2. Full erosion and sedimentation measures will be put in place prior to and during grading and construction work activities. 3. All grading and construction activity will be in compliance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations and codes, as well as in compliance with the City’s Land Disturbance Guidance Document. 4. All work on site will only be performed between the hours of 7:00 AM and 8:00 PM Monday through Friday; 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM weekends. 5. All disturbed areas in and around the project site shall be restored and have an established and permanent ground cover immediately after the project is completed. Planning Report-Case #2019-26 (M. Mosvick) Page 5 FINDINGS OF FACT FOR APPROVAL Critical Area Permit for 1135 Orchard Place The following Findings of Fact are made in support of approval of the proposed requests: 1. The proposed single-family dwelling project meets the purpose and intent of the Critical Area Overlay District. 2. The proposed work and disturbance to construct this new single-family dwelling is deemed minimal, reasonable and within the spirit and intent of the Critical Area Overlay District. 3. The proposed single-family dwelling project will be a nice addition to the neighborhood and is in keeping with the character of the area. 4. The construction of this new single-family dwelling will comply with all standards and regulations of the Zoning Ordinance and other applicable ordinances. F.D.RADON -UPUP (17) EQ. R.& 10" TREADSW/ 1" NOSINGDRAWING TITLE:7−16−19LOCATION:PAGEPAGE DESCRIPTION:LDLITTFINDESIGN.COMMLITTFIN@HOTMAIL.COM320−224−7844WINSTED, MNCURRENTDATE:REVISION:REV. DATE:© CO PYRIGHT 2019ALL PLANS & DESIGNS SHOWNARE THE PROPERTY OF LITTFINDESIGN. USE OF THESE PLANSON ANY OTHER PROJECT/LOTOTHER THAN NOTED ON THISTITLEBLOCK WITHOUT THEWRITTEN CONSENT OF LITTFINDESIGN IS PROHIBITED.ISSUE FOR BID ONLY7-16-19SHEET INDEX:CCOVERA1 FRONT & SIDE ELEVATIONA2 REAR & SIDE ELEVATIONA4 FOUNDATION & FIN. BSMT.A5 FIRST FLOOR PLANS1. ALL EXTERIOR WALLS TO HAVE A MINIMUM RATINGOF R-20.2. ALL ATTIC SPACES ARE TO HAVE A MINIMUM RATINGOF R-49.3. ALL FLOOR SPACES OVER UNCONDITIONED SPACE OR CANTILEVERED ARE TO BE INSULATED TO MIN. R30.1. ALL CEILINGS ARE TO HAVE 5/8" NON-SAG GYPSUM BOARD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.2. ALL WALLS ARE TO HAVE 12" GYPSUM BOARD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.3. GARAGE CEILING AND WALLS THAT ADJOIN HOUSE WALLS ARE TO BE 58" GYPSUM BOARD PER CODE.1. ALL WINDOWS AND DOORS TO BE DOUBLE PANE GLASS PANELS WITH LOW-E RATINGS.2. ANY WINDOW WITHIN 24" OF A DOOR SWING MUSTBE TEMPERED PER CODE.3. ANY WINDOW ABOVE A TUB/WET AREA MUST BETEMPERED PER CODE.4. ANY WINDOW WITHIN A STAIRWAY MUST BETEMPERED PER CODE.5. WINDOW GLAZING MUST BE AT LEAST 18" A.F.F. WHEN WINDOW IS ABOVE 6' FROM GRADE. IF WITHIN18", WINDOW MUST BE TEMPERED.6. ALL BEDROOMS TO HAVE AT LEAST ONE WINDOWTHAT HAS A CLEAR EGRESS OPENING OF 5.7 SQ. FT.WITH MIN. DIMENSIONS OF 24" IN HEIGHT AND 20"IN WIDTH, SILL HEIGHT NOT TO BE GREATER THAN 44"A.F.F.7. WINDOWS WITH SILLS WITHIN 3' OF THE FLOORTHEY SERVE AND ARE 72" ABOVE GRADE MUST EITHERHAVE A FALL PREVENTION OR OPENING LIMITERDEVICE PER CODE.1. ALL ELECTRICAL AND MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT TOBE VERIFIED AND INSTALLED PER CODE BY APPROVEDTRADES AND INSTALLERS.2. HVAC CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY LAYOUT FORDUCT-RUNS BEFORE INSTALLATION, IF MODIFICATIONIS REQUIRED, REPORT INFORMATION/CHANGES TOCONTRACTOR & LITTFIN DESIGN.1. ALL EXTERIOR WALLS TO BE 16" O.C. WITH ADOUBLE TOP PLATE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.2. WALL FRAMING SHALL BE S.P.F. STUD GRADE ORBETTER UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE (U.N.O.)3. ALL HEADERS SHALL BE PER PLAN4. ALL EXTERIOR HEADERS SHALL HAVE (1)2X6 BEARING STUD & (1) 2X6 FULL HEIGHT KINGSTUD ON EACH SIDE U.N.O. (REVIEW PLANS)5. ALL INTERNAL HEADERS & BEAMS SHALL HAVE(1)2X6 OR (1)2X4 BEARING STUD ON EACH SIDE U.N.O.6. EXTERIOR SHEATHING SHALL BE 7/16" MATERIAL CONSISTING OF ORIENTED STRAND BOARD (OSB).-ALLFLOOR AND CEILING SYSTEMS TO BE CHECKED ANDDESIGNED BY THE DESIGNATED MANUFACTURER.FLOOR PLANS TO BE ON SITE.7. HEADER SIZES ARE TO BE USED PER PLAN AND DEVIATION FROM ANY SIZE MUST BEAPPROVED BY DESIGNERS.8. PRESSURE TREADED WOOD IS TO BE USED WHEREWOOD IS IN CONTACT WITH CONCRETE AND AT 2X6MUD SILL. TREATED MEMBERS TO BE S.Y.P.#2 ORBETTER.9. FOR OPENINGS IN EXTERIOR WALLS (OR WALLS W/LATERAL LOADING:a. 0'-0" - 4'-0" = 1 JACK STUDb. 4'-0" - 8'-0" = 2 JACK STUDSc. 8'-0" - 12'-0" = 3 JACK STUDSd. GREATER THAN 12' = CONSULT ENG.10. POSTS CALLED OUT ARE NUMBER OF KING STUDSREQUIRED PER SIDE OF OPENING.1. ALL CONCRETE FOOTINGS AND FOUNDATIONSYSTEMS ARE DESIGNED FOR A 2000 P.SF. SOIL.2. FOUNDATION WALLS SHALL BE FULL HEIGHT ATUNBALANCED FILL GREATER THAN 3'4".3. 1/2" ANCHOR BOLTS EMBEDDED 7" MINIMUM @ 6' O.C. MAX. 12" MIN, FROM EACH END. MINIMUM OF 2 BOLTS IN EACH SILL PLATE (REFER TO STRUCTURALPAGES).4. PAD FOOTING REINFORCEMENT IS TO BE LOCATED(3") FROM BOTTOM OF FOOTING TYP. (WHENREQUIRED)5. REFER TO STRUCTURAL PAGES FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING RE-BAR/ETC.6. SINGLE FAMILY CONSTRUCTION TYPE IRC-1-2015 MINNESOTA STATE RESIDENTIAL CODE-2017 NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE-2015 MINNESOTA STATE MECHANICAL&FUEL GASCODE-2015 MINNESOTA STATE FIRE CODE-2015 MINNESOTA PLUMBING CODEDESIGNED WITH 2000 PSF SOILS, ALL FOUNDATIONCONSTRUCTION MUST FACTOR IN THIS AT A MINIMUM.DESIGNED WITH "EXPOSURE B" CLASSIFICATIONS ANDWINDGUSTS OF 90 MPH PER 2015 MN RESIDENTIAL CODEREGULATIONS.-ALL FOUNDATION WALL STRUCTURAL INFORMATIONUSED TO CONSTRUCT THE FOUNDATION SYSTEM IS TOBE ON SITE WHEN POURING OR BUILDING WALLS.-ALL STRUCTURAL BEAMS, POSTS & TALL WALLS ARETO BE BUILT PER I-LEVEL SPECIFICATIONS.-ALL MANUFACTURED FLOOR & ROOF TRUSSES ARETO BE INSTALLED PER MANUFACTURERSSPECIFICATIONS.-ALL MANUFACTURED FLOOR & ROOF TRUSSSPECIFICATIONS ARE TO BE ON SITE DURINGINSTALLATION.-SH3050 EQUALS SINGLE HUNG 3'0" BY 5'0"-FX2646 EQUALS FIXED 2'6" BY 4'6"CCOVERSHEETSCALED PRINT @ 24X36 1'-8 1/4"3'-4"10'-1 1/8"8'-0"6"17'-1 1/8"1'-8 1/4"9'-0"10'-1 1/8"8'-0"6"17'-1 1/8"1/4" = 1'-0" FRONT ELEVATION16'-0"7'-8 1/4"9'-2 1/4"4'-3 5/8"2'-1 5/8"1'-6"1'-6"4'-0"1'-6 3/4"3'-4"10'-1 1/8"8'-0"6"17'-1 1/8"8'-9 1/2"6'-8"1'-8 1/4"3'-4"10'-1 1/8"8'-0"6"17'-1 1/8"1/4" = 1'-0" LEFT ELEVATION24'-0"DRAWING TITLE:7−16−19LOCATION:PAGEPAGE DESCRIPTION:LDLITTFINDESIGN.COMMLITTFIN@HOTMAIL.COM320−224−7844WINSTED, MNCURRENTDATE:REVISION:REV. DATE:© CO PYRIGHT 2019ALL PLANS & DESIGNS SHOWNARE THE PROPERTY OF LITTFINDESIGN. USE OF THESE PLANSON ANY OTHER PROJECT/LOTOTHER THAN NOTED ON THISTITLEBLOCK WITHOUT THEWRITTEN CONSENT OF LITTFINDESIGN IS PROHIBITED.ISSUE FOR BID ONLY7-16-19A1FRONT &LEFTELEVATIONSCALED PRINT @ 24X369. DOTTED AREA ON ROOF PLANINDICATES LOCATION OFICE/WATER BARRIER.10. HOLD STONE OFF GRADEMINIMUM OF 3".11. REFER TO MANUF.SPECIFICATIONS FOR STONE.12. GARAGE BUCK BOARDMATERIAL IS TO BE COMPOSITEWOOD AND SIZED TO COVER THEEDGE OF STONE.14.ALL BEAMS HOLDING UP PORCHROOFS ARE TO BE DROPPEDUNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.1. ALL EXT. TRIM TO BE FLASHED PER CODE.2. SUPPLY DRIPCAPS ON ALL WINDOWS AND DOORS.3. SUPPLY SEPARATION BETWEEN WOOD, COMPOSITEWOOD AND ANY OTHER WOOD MATERIAL PERSPECIFICATIONS.4. SUPPLY AT LEAST 6" OF SPACE BETWEEN BOTTOMS OFWINDOWS AND ROOFS.5. GRADE CONDITIONS MAY VARY ON SITE.6. PROVIDE ROOF AND SOFFIT VENTS PER IRC CODEREGULATIONS.7. ALL FURNACE FLUES, PLUMBING VENTS, FIREPLACEVENTS AND OTHER PENETRATIONS THROUGH ROOF ORWALLS TO EXTEND THROUGH REAR OF HOME WHENEVERPOSSIBLE.8. ALL PENETRATIONS THROUGH EXTERIOR WALLS ORROOFING MUST BE SEALED AND FLASHED PER MANUF.SPECIFICATIONS AND IRC CODE REGULATIONS. ©COPYRIGHT 2019MLITTFIN@HOTMAIL.COM320-224-7844 1'-6 3/4"3'-4"10'-1 1/8"8'-0"6"17'-1 1/8"5'-9 1/2"3'-8"1'-6 3/4"3'-4"10'-1 1/8"8'-0"6"17'-1 1/8"8'-9 1/2"6'-8"1/4" = 1'-0" REAR ELEVATION11'-6 3/4"3'-4"10'-1 1/8"8'-0"6"17'-1 1/8"5'-9 1/2"3'-8"1'-8 1/4"3'-4"10'-1 1/8"8'-0"6"17'-1 1/8"1/4" = 1'-0" RIGHT ELEVATION24'-0"DRAWING TITLE:7−16−19LOCATION:PAGEPAGE DESCRIPTION:LDLITTFINDESIGN.COMMLITTFIN@HOTMAIL.COM320−224−7844WINSTED, MNCURRENTDATE:REVISION:REV. DATE:© CO PYRIGHT 2019ALL PLANS & DESIGNS SHOWNARE THE PROPERTY OF LITTFINDESIGN. USE OF THESE PLANSON ANY OTHER PROJECT/LOTOTHER THAN NOTED ON THISTITLEBLOCK WITHOUT THEWRITTEN CONSENT OF LITTFINDESIGN IS PROHIBITED.ISSUE FOR BID ONLY7-16-19A2REAR &RIGHT SIDESCALED PRINT @ 24X369. DOTTED AREA ON ROOF PLANINDICATES LOCATION OFICE/WATER BARRIER.10. HOLD STONE OFF GRADEMINIMUM OF 3".11. REFER TO MANUF.SPECIFICATIONS FOR STONE.12. GARAGE BUCK BOARDMATERIAL IS TO BE COMPOSITEWOOD AND SIZED TO COVER THEEDGE OF STONE.14.ALL BEAMS HOLDING UP PORCHROOFS ARE TO BE DROPPEDUNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.1. ALL EXT. TRIM TO BE FLASHEDPER CODE.2. SUPPLY DRIPCAPS ON ALLWINDOWS AND DOORS.3. SUPPLY SEPARATION BETWEENWOOD, COMPOSITE WOOD ANDANY OTHER WOOD MATERIAL PERSPECIFICATIONS.4. SUPPLY AT LEAST 6" OF SPACEBETWEEN BOTTOMS OF WINDOWSAND ROOFS.5. GRADE CONDITIONS MAY VARYON SITE.6. PROVIDE ROOF AND SOFFITVENTS PER IRC CODEREGULATIONS.7. ALL FURNACE FLUES, PLUMBINGVENTS, FIREPLACE VENTS ANDOTHER PENETRATIONS THROUGHROOF OR WALLS TO EXTENDTHROUGH REAR OF HOMEWHENEVER POSSIBLE.8. ALL PENETRATIONS THROUGHEXTERIOR WALLS OR ROOFINGMUST BE SEALED AND FLASHEDPER MANUF. SPECIFICATIONS ANDIRC CODE REGULATIONS. ©COPYRIGHT 2019MLITTFIN@HOTMAIL.COM320-224-7844 ©COPYRIGHT 2019MLITTFIN@HOTMAIL.COM320-224-7844 F.D.CONCRETETILEWOOD OR TILE34'X19'7"CONCRETE24'X11'2'CARPETCARPETCARPET15'X14'CARPET13'8"X14'TILECONCRETE29'3"X19'/16'4 1/2"5'-0"8'-8"29'-0 1/2"4'-3"4'-6 1/2"11'-1"4 1/2"11'-6"5'-3 1/2"14'-3 1/2"6"8 1/2"11'-2"5'-7 1/2"5'-0"20'-3 1/2"6"4'-7 1/2"6'-0"3'-0"4 1/2"8'-4 1/2"6"2'-3"2'-10 1/2"2'-10 1/2"27'-4 1/2"8'-0"3'-1"5'-6"1'-4"5 1/2"4 1/2"11'-0"9'-2"2 1/2"8'-8 1/2"11'-1"4 1/2"6 1/2"2 1/2"4'-3 1/2"6'-8"4 1/2"3'-9 1/2"2 1/2"5'-2"6'-0"6"6'-1 3/4"6'-0"6'-1 3/4"2'-3 1/2"6'-8 1/2"3'-0"5'-8 1/2"2'-9"4'-3 1/2"5'-0"9 1/2"5'-2 1/2"1'-6"6"5'-1 1/2"2'-10 1/2"2'-10 1/2"5'-1 1/2"5'-3"3'-4 1/2"3'-4 1/2"6'-0"5'-1"4'-7 1/2"2'-10 1/2"3'-9"6"6"6"6"6"3'-0"8'-0"6"11'-0"4'-5 1/2"2'-10 1/2"2'-10 1/2"4'-3 1/2"14'-6"16'-0"18'-0"16'-4"FRAME OUT 2X4 WALL@ FULL FOUNDATION WALL,HOLD OFF WALL 1" & SHEETROCKFINISHED SIDE PER DETAILS. WOODCAP OVER TOP OF WINDOW WALLFRAME OUT 2X4 WALL@ FULL FOUNDATION WALL,HOLD OFF WALL 1" & SHEETROCKFINISHED SIDE PER DETAILS. WOODCAP OVER TOP OF WINDOW WALLFRAME OUT 2X4 WALL@ FULL FOUNDATION WALL,HOLD OFF WALL 1" & SHEETROCKFINISHED SIDE PER DETAILS. WOODCAP OVER TOP OF WINDOW WALLFRAME OUT 2X4 WALL@ FULL FOUNDATION WALL,HOLD OFF WALL 1" & SHEETROCKFINISHED SIDE PER DETAILS.FRAME OUT 2X4 WALL@ FULL FOUNDATION WALL,HOLD OFF WALL 1" & SHEETROCKFINISHED SIDE PER DETAILS.UP (17) EQ. R.& 10" TREADSW/ 1" NOSINGSUPPLY CONTINOUS HANDRAILPER CODE AT ALL STAIRLOCATIONS, CODE HANDRAILIS TO CONTINUE TO LANDINGS/TOP & BOTTOM OF STAIRS.CONTRACTOR & INSTALLER TOVERIFY IF ADDITIONAL GRIPABLEHANDRAIL IS INSTALLED OR IFDECORATIVE HANDRAIL TO CONTINUE.ALL STAIRWAYS (INTERIOR ANDEXTERIOR) ARE TO BE ILLUMINATEDAT EACH LANDING PER CODE.INSTALL DRAFT STOPPINGWITHIN FLOOR SYSTEM PER IRCCODE SECTION 302.12, MIN. 12" GYPSUMBOARD (OR) 38" STRUCTURAL BOARDADEQUATELY SUPPORTED BY2X4 MIN. MATERIAL, PARALLEL WITHFLOOR FRAMING, SEPARATING AREAS WITHMAXIMUM SPACE OF 1000 SQ.FT.-SEPARATE INTO EQUAL SPACES.12" GYPSUM BDTO BE APPLIEDTO UNDERSIDEOF STAIRS PERCODE.SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 1704 FINISHED SQUARE FEET FINISHED BASEMENT1DRAWING TITLE:7−16−19LOCATION:PAGEPAGE DESCRIPTION:LDLITTFINDESIGN.COMMLITTFIN@HOTMAIL.COM320−224−7844WINSTED, MNCURRENTDATE:REVISION:REV. DATE:© CO PYRIGHT 2019ALL PLANS & DESIGNS SHOWNARE THE PROPERTY OF LITTFINDESIGN. USE OF THESE PLANSON ANY OTHER PROJECT/LOTOTHER THAN NOTED ON THISTITLEBLOCK WITHOUT THEWRITTEN CONSENT OF LITTFINDESIGN IS PROHIBITED.ISSUE FOR BID ONLY7-16-19A4FOUNDATION& FINISHEDBASEMENTSCALED PRINT @ 24X361. FOUNDATIONS TO BE POURED PER SITE SOIL CONDITION.2. ALL REINFORCING IS TO BE INSTALLED PER IRC REGULATED STRUCTURAL DESIGN BY CONCRETETRADES.3. PROVIDE 12" ANCHOR BOLTS EMBEDDED 8" MIN., SPACED PER CODE AND 12" MAX FROM EACH END OFSILLPLATE, MIN 2 PER SILL.4. PROVIDE CONTROL JOINTS PER PLAN, JOIST TO CONSIST OF HIDDEN ZIP STRIP EMBEDDED INTO THESLABS.5. ALL ANGLED WALLS ARE TO BE 45 DEGREES UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.6. SLOPE CONCRETE TO FLOOR DRAINS WITHIN 5' OF DRAINS.7. ALL WOOD MATERIAL CONTACTING DIRECTLY TO CONCRETE MUST BE TREATED OR DESIGNED TOCONTACT CONCRETE.8. STEP FOOTINGS PER PLAN SPECIFICATIONS.9. PROVIDE DRAINTILE AROUND PERIMETER AS SHOWN. LATERAL SOIL PRESSURE ASSUMED TO BE 30PSF/FT.-SH3050 =SINGLE HUNG 3'0" BY 5'0"-FX2646 = FIXED 2'6" BY 4'6"-CASE3050 = CASEMENT 3'0" BY 5'0"-2868 @ DOOR =2'8" WIDE BY 6'8" TALL-2880 @ DOOR =2'8" WIDE BY 8'0" TALL TILEWOOD16'X15'WOODTILECONCRETE32'X27'6"WOOD15'X13'WOODCOMPOSITE18'X16'WOOD12'X14'COMPOSITE11'3"X19'TILE6"3'-8 1/4"2'-10 1/2"2'-10 1/2"2'-10 1/2"3'-8 1/4"1'-10 1/2"3'-4 1/2"3'-4 1/2"3'-4 1/2"3'-4 1/2"2'-7 1/2"3'-6"2'-10 1/2"2'-10 1/2"2'-10 1/2"4'-2 1/2"4'-5 1/2"2'-10 1/2"2'-10 1/2"2'-3 1/2"12'-6"2'-2"2'-0"14'-8"16'-0"18'-0"16'-4"4'-6"7"11'-3"18'-0"67 06"6"6"6"6"6"10'-4 1/2"2'-10 1/2"2'-10 1/2"10'-4 1/2"6'-9"3'-9"10'-6"5'-5 1/2"10"14'-9 1/2"2'-6 3/4"2'-10 1/2"2'-10 1/2"2'-8 1/4"8'-0"11'-0"31'-7"26'-6"2'-0"79'-1"6"6"6"6"6"2'-0"18'-0"2'-0"6"9'-0"1'-6"11'-0"22'-0"21'-6"12'-6"67'-0"6"6"6"6"6"3'-4 1/2"2'-10 1/2"2'-10 1/2"3'-4 1/2"1'-6"5'-5"1'-6"7'-6"1'-6"9'-0"8'-5"4'-1"1'-10"2'-3"4'-2 1/2"4'-2 1/2"3'-5"2'-10 1/2"2'-8 1/2"4'-1"8'-5"9'-0"7'-8 1/2"5'-5 1/2"4'-8 1/2"15'-1 1/2"7'-5 1/2"6"5 1/2"6"5'-0"6"1'-6"2'-0"6'-0"1'-6"6"8'-6"6'-0"6'-3 1/2"15'-9 1/2"36'-7"23'-6"79'-1"4'-6"14'-6"6"2'-7 1/2"2'-10 1/2"2'-10 1/2"2'-7 1/2"5'-6"11'-0"5'-6"6'-0"8"8"6"6"6"3'-0"8'-0"4'-0"4'-0"6"5'-2"5'-10"4'-3 1/2"1'-6"7'-0"7'-3 1/2"6"5 1/2"6"6"8'-8"3'-11 1/2"6'-8"3'-6"11'-7"9'-1 1/2"4'-2"4'-6 1/2"3'-7"3'-8"4'-6 1/2"6"5'-8 1/2"2'-9 1/2"3'-0"10'-0"2'-9"6"2'-8 1/2"5'-11 1/2"5'-8 1/2"6'-3 1/2"5'-0"1'-0"2'-0"5'-8 3/4"7'-0"6'-10 3/4"3'-6"1'-1 1/2"5'-10"4'-6"6"1'-6"6'-0"7'-6"1'-0"1'-0"6'-9"5'-6 1/2"5 1/2"6"4'-6"6'-0"1'-6"16'-0"2'-0"12'-0 1/2"2'-0"2'-0"11'-0"2'-0"5'-6 1/4"7"5'-2 7/8"7"5'-2 7/8"7"5'-2 7/8"7"5'-6 3/8"SUPPLY CONTINOUS HANDRAILPER CODE AT ALL STAIRLOCATIONS, CODE HANDRAILIS TO CONTINUE TO LANDINGS/TOP & BOTTOM OF STAIRS.CONTRACTOR & INSTALLER TOVERIFY IF ADDITIONAL GRIPABLEHANDRAIL IS INSTALLED OR IFDECORATIVE HANDRAIL TOCONTINUE.ALL STAIRWAYS (INTERIOR ANDEXTERIOR) ARE TO BE ILLUMINATEDAT EACH LANDING PER CODE.INDICATES EXTERIOR WALLSTUDS SPACED AT 12" O.C.BALLOON FRAMED WALL,TIMBERSTRAND MATERIALOR BETTER. (2-PLY TIMBER-STRAND KING STUDS @ EACHSIDE OF OPENINGS IN WALL).INDICATES INTERIORBEARING WALL, 16" O.C.STUDSINSTALL DRAFT STOPPINGWITHIN FLOOR SYSTEM PER IRCCODE SECTION 302.12, MIN. 12" GYPSUMBOARD (OR) 38" STRUCTURAL BOARDADEQUATELY SUPPORTED BY2X4 MIN. MATERIAL, PARALLEL WITHFLOOR FRAMING, SEPARATING AREAS WITHMAXIMUM SPACE OF 1000 SQ.FT.-SEPARATE INTO EQUAL SPACES.CONCRETE STAIRS W/ 7-3/4"MAXIMUM RISERS & 10" TREADS.INSTALL 3' TALL CODE RAIL WHENMORE THAN 3 RISERS OR 30", BUILDSTAIRS INTO FRONT OF PORCH4' WIDE CEDAR STAIRS W/ 7-3/4"MAXIMUM RISERS & 10" TREADS.INSTALL 3' TALL CODE RAIL WHENMORE THAN 3 RISERS OR 30"SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2345 FINISHED SQUARE FEET FIRST FLOOR PLAN12'-6"DN (17) EQ. R.& 10" TREADSW/ 1" NOSINGDN (17) EQ. R.& 10" TREADSW/ 1" NOSING(VERIFY W/ GRADE)1. ALL HEADERS TO BE SUPPORTED BY A MINIMUM OF (1) TRIMMER. (UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE)2. ALL HEADERS TO HAVE AT LEAST (1) KING STUD (UNLESS NOTED).3. ALL STUD CALLOUTS @ SIDES OF WINDOWS/DOORS ARE TRIMMERS, MINIMUM (1) KING STUDS @ SAID LOCATIONS TO BE INCLUDED AS WELL.4. BLOCKING @ ROOF & FLOOR PLAN PER TRUSS MANUFACTURER.5. POINT LOADS TO BE CARRIED THROUGH FLOOR AREAS AND DOWN TO FOUNDATION FOR SUPPORT.6. ALL HANGERS & CONNECTORS PER TRUSS MANUFACTURER, SUPPLIERS & CONTRACTOR.7. ALL EXTERIOR SHEATHING TO BE 7/16" OSB SHEATHING & NAILED PER CODE (MAY BE REFERRED TO AS 1/2" NOMINAL THICKNESS).8. ROOF DECKING TO BE 12" NOMINAL (OR 1532") OSB DECKING W/ CLIPS, NAILED TO ROOF FRAMING W/ MIN. 8d COMMON NAILS, 6" O.C. @ EDGES/12"O.C. @ FIELD.9. FLOOR DECKING TO BE 34" PLYWOOD DECKING, NAILED OR SCREWED TO FLOOR SYSTEM PER CODE W/ ADHESIVE PER SPEC. (OR) MIN. 6d COMMON NAILS 6" O.C. @ EDGES/ 12" O.C. @ FIELD (CODE MINIMUM).10. REFER TO WALL BRACING PLANS FOR ADDITIONAL FRAMING INFORMATION.DRAWING TITLE:7−16−19LOCATION:PAGEPAGE DESCRIPTION:LDLITTFINDESIGN.COMMLITTFIN@HOTMAIL.COM320−224−7844WINSTED, MNCURRENTDATE:REVISION:REV. DATE:© CO PYRIGHT 2019ALL PLANS & DESIGNS SHOWNARE THE PROPERTY OF LITTFINDESIGN. USE OF THESE PLANSON ANY OTHER PROJECT/LOTOTHER THAN NOTED ON THISTITLEBLOCK WITHOUT THEWRITTEN CONSENT OF LITTFINDESIGN IS PROHIBITED.ISSUE FOR BID ONLY7-16-19A5FIRST FLOORPLANSCALED PRINT @ 24X361. ALL NON-BEARING FRAMING IS TO BE 16" O.C.UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.2. ALL WALLS TO HAVE A DOUBLE TOP PLATEUNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.3. ALL EXTERIOR WALLS ARE TO BE 2X6 WOODSTUDS WITH 7/16" OSB SHEATHING, UNLESSNOTED OTHERWISE.4. ALL INTERIOR WALLS ARE TOB E 2X4 WOODSTUDS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.5. ALL COLUMN SIZES ARE TO BE CONTINUEDTHROUGH FLOOR TRUSS SPACES WHENSPANNING MORE THAN 1 FLOOR.6. ALL WOOD MATERIALS ARE TO BE PROTECTEDPER CODE & MANUF. SPECIFICATIONS WHILEBEING STORED ON SITE.-SH3050 =SINGLE HUNG 3'0" BY 5'0"-FX2646 = FIXED 2'6" BY 4'6"-CASE3050 = CASEMENT 3'0" BY 5'0"-2868 @ DOOR =2'8" WIDE BY 6'8" TALL-2880 @ DOOR =2'8" WIDE BY 8'0" TALL Planning Staff Report MEETING DATE: September 24, 2019 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Tim Benetti, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Planning Case 2019-27 ZONING CODE AMENDMENT Floor Area Ratio (FAR) Standard in I-Industrial District APPLICANT: City of Mendota Heights/Metro Storage LLC ACTION DEADLINE: N/A INTRODUCTION The City of Mendota Heights, in conjunction with Metro Storage, LLC, is requesting consideration of amending the city’s current floor area ratio (FAR) standard for uses in the I-Industrial District. BACKGROUND At the previous August 27th Planning Commission meeting, Metro Storage, LLC submitted for consideration Planning Application Case No. 2019-20, a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow a new three-story, 117,810-sf., interior only self-storage facility. Personal Self-Storage uses were recently added under a separate zoning ordinance amendment by Ordinance No. 538 (adopted 05/21/2019). As part of the CUP application, Metro Storage also requested a Variance to the required FAR standard for their new development, due to the new storage facility would exceed the maximum FAR of 0.5 up to 1.23. After some considerable discussion on the CUP and Variance requests, and upon closing the public hearing, a motion was made to deny the variance request, whereupon the motion failed on a 3-3-1 vote, resulting in no decision or recommendation. The Commission thereafter made a follow-up motion to table Planning Application Case No. 2019-20 until the September 24, 2019 meeting, and directed city staff and/or Applicant to prepare and present a separate code amendment to the industrial zone code to alter the floor area ratio standard. The amendment, if approved, would in effect annul the variance on the FAR standard for the new storage facility. Planning Case 2019-27( Zoning Code Amendment –FAR I-Zone) Page 2 of 3 ANALYSIS Per City Code Title 12-1G-7: Site and Structure Requirements for the Industrial District, the floor area ratio (FAR) for buildings shall not exceed 0.5. Floor Area Ratio (FAR) is defined or determined as: the numerical value obtained through dividing the floor area of a building or buildings by the lot area on which such building or buildings are located. On sites where a new multi-story building is being proposed, this 0.5 FAR standard can impose some challenging restrictions on the planned or desired (overall) size of a proposed building space. Metro Storage is requesting a new building with an FAR of 1.23, due to the multiple stories (three) inside the new storage facility. Even though the new building is shown with a 39,270-sf. footprint and a 40.9% lot coverage calculation, the multiple stories added together pushes the proposed FAR well-over the 0.5 standard. As was noted in the August 27th planning report, new Ordinance No. 538 established certain development standards for personal self-storage uses, which included a much reduced parking space standard of 1 space per 6,000-sf. of storage area space. Since this storage use does not demand or require the parking that a typical office/manufacturing use needs, a larger building can potentially be built on an industrial (vacant) site such as the subject property, which is the case being made under Planning Application No. 2019-20. The 45-ft. building height standard also provides an opportunity for a development to incorporate multiple stores, with 12 to 15-ft. high ceilings on each floor. This self-storage use parking standard, along with the current 45-ft. building height standard, essentially created an opportunity for the Developer to significantly reduce the open hard surface (parking) areas needed on this site, thus allowing the developer to design or request a larger, multi- storied building tailored for this type of use on the vacant industrial site. An argument can be made that the 0.5 FAR standard limits the ability of any developer to maximize the available land space with a larger, multi-story building. With the new building coverage at 40.9%, the remaining 59.1% of lot area was allocated to the open parking and driveway areas, landscaped spaces, and large spaces for the on-site storm-water treatment systems, consisting of the proposed infiltration and retention ponds along the west and south sides of the building. When considering new amendment request such as this one, it is ideal to research and compare what other communities apply in their own ordinances and/or similar districts. Attached for the Planning Commission’s review, is a comparison table of other metro cities standards, including FAR, building lot coverage percentages, and building heights. A majority of these cities do not have or use an FAR in their Industrial districts. Bloomington, Minneapolis, and St. Paul allow for the most, with 2.0, 2.7 and up to 5.0 respectively. Other cities have amid-range or similar FAR standard from 0.5 to 1.5 (Minnetonka, St. Louis Park) - with Brooklyn Park allowing a 1.1 FAR with an allowance to exceed this 1.1 ratio (no limit) by means of a CUP application. Those cities without any FAR also have reasonable amount of maximum building coverage of 30- 50%, with the higher amount being equal to Mendota Heights. The maximum lot coverage Planning Case 2019-27( Zoning Code Amendment –FAR I-Zone) Page 3 of 3 (percentages) range from a low of 35% (Farmington) to 70-/75%, and all the way up to 90% in Vadnais Heights. Building heights for these other cities appear to be at or near (equal) or in some cases exceed our city’s own 45-ft. height limits. City staff also investigated and estimated the FAR’s (based on Dakota County Assessor records) on the properties throughout the city’s industrial park, which today is seen with a mix of typical industrial based businesses and office/warehouse type uses. Surprisingly, almost every one of the properties inside the Industrial Park area is under the 0.5 FAR standard set by the current Industrial District regulations. The only exception is the multi-story American Corp Center office development at 1285-1295 Northland Drive, with an estimated FAR of 0.92. (note: city staff did not find any record of a variance granted to this site or office development for this increased FAR level). The Fairfield Inn and Suites at 1330 Northland Drive came in just over with an estimated 0.51 FAR. Attached for the commission’s review is map with FAR tags on most of the Industrial Park properties. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The City is asked to make a decision on one of two amendment proposals: i.) remove subpart section F. Floor Area Ratio: Floor area ratio shall not exceed 0.5. under Sect. 12-1G-7; or ii.) amend Subpart F. with a proposed new higher ratio standard (say 1.5 or 2.0). In Staff’s opinion, removing the FAR is appropriate and supported, and can be viewed as consistent with many other metro communities’ own ordinances. By keeping the 50% building coverage standard, along with standard building and parking lot setbacks required under the I Zone regulations, the existing uses in the Industrial Park should remain conforming, and any future permitted industrial zoned uses (both new or expanded) should have enough space on most parcels for providing adequate building coverage/size, parking areas, open/landscaped areas, and on-site storm water systems. Staff is recommending the Planning Commission consider approval of the requested Zoning Code Amendments as presented under the attached Draft Ordinance No. 544, with an option to choose to either strike out the current FAR standard in its entirety; or choose to keep the FAR provision in place, but with a new FAR standard of either 1.5, 2.0 or a value determined by the Commission. Please note that should the Commission decide to strike or modify the current 0.5 FAR standard under Section 12-1G-7, then the separate application concerning Planning Case No. 2019-20, the CUP to allow the personal self-storage facility in the I-Industrial District, may proceed without the variance. Attachments 1) Draft Ordinance No. 544 2) Comparison Table of Metro Cities FAR / Lot/Bldg. Coverage 3) Map of City’s Industrial Park Properties w/ FAR Tags D R A F T CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 544 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 12, ARTICLE G. I INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT, CHAPTER 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS REGARDING FLOOR AREA RATIO STANDARDS The City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota, does hereby ordain: Section 1. Title 12-1G-7: Site and Structure Requirements is amended as follows: F. Floor Area Ratio: Floor area ratio shall not exceed 0.5. OR F. Floor Area Ratio: Floor area ratio shall not exceed 0.5 1.5 or 2.0 (or value determined by Planning Commission) Section 2. This ordinance shall be in effect from and after the date of its passage and publication. Adopted and ordained into an ordinance this ______ day of ______________, 2019. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS Neil Garlock, Mayor ATTEST Lorri Smith, City Clerk (Strikeout text indicates matter to be deleted, while underlined text indicates new matter) Drafted by: City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 COMPARISON TABLE of METRO CITIES FAR / LOT COVERAGE / BLDG. HEIGHT STANDARDS CITY FAR MAX. BLDG. COVER MAX. LOT COVER GREEN SPACE BUILDING HEIGHT MENDOTA HTS 0.5 50% 45’ Albertville N/A 85% 45’ Apple Valley N/A 30-40% 40’ Blaine N/A 50’ Bloomington 1.0 to 2.0 Brooklyn Park 1.1 (or CUP to exceed 1.1) 75% 20% N/A Burnsville N/A 50% N/A (45’+ by CUP) Cottage Grove N/A 35-50% 35’ - 60’ Eagan N/A 35% 25% 40’ Eden Prairie 0.3 (1 story) to 0.5 (multi-story) 40’ Farmington N/A 35% 45’ Inver Grove Hts. N/A 30 – 40% 60’ Lakeville N/A N/A 45’ or 4 stories Minneapolis 2.7 65’ or 4 stories Minnetonka 1.0 – 1.5 85 35’ Rosemount N/A 70 – 75% 75’ St. Louis Park 0.5 – 1.0 75-ft. or 6 stories St. Paul 2.0 – 5.0 50’-75’ South St. Paul 0.2 (minimum) 40% 15% 50’ Woodbury N/A 70% 50’ West St. Paul N/A 50% 45’ Vadnais Heights N/A 90% 45’ IND USTRIAL PA RK - FA R R ES ULTS Property Information August 29, 2019 0 1,20 0 2,40 0600 ft 0 380 760190 m 1:9,600 Disclaimer: Map and parcel data are believed to be ac curate, but acc uracy is not guaranteed. This is not a legal document and should not be substituted for a title s earch,appraisal, survey, or for zoning verification. Planning Commission Memo Cover DATE: September 24, 2019 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Tim Benetti, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Planning Case 2019-20 Conditional Use Permit & Variance for New Self-Storage Facility in the Industrial Zone APPLICANT: Metro Storage, LLC PROPERTY ADDRESS: 1178 Northland Drive Commissioners: Attached for your continued review is a copy of the Planning Staff Report for Planning Case No. 2019-20, Metro Storage LLC’s request for a conditional use permit (CUP) and variance to construct a new personal self-storage facility, located at 1178 Northland Drive. This report was originally presented at the August 27, 2019 meeting. This application was TABLED at the August 27th meeting, in order to allow staff and the Applicant time to prepare and present a new Zoning Code Amendment request for removing or modifying the floor area ratio (FAR) standard under City Code Title 12-1G-7 Site and Structure Requirements for the Industrial District. Prior to taking up this item again, the Planning Commission should receive a separate staff report, research information and presentation related to this requested Code Amendment. Should the Commission elect to strike or modify the current 0.5 FAR standard under Section 12-1G- 7, then the application concerning Planning Case No. 2019-20, the CUP to allow the personal self- storage facility in the I-Industrial District, may proceed without the variance. Planning Staff Report DATE: August 27, 2019 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Tim Benetti, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Planning Case 2019-20 Conditional Use Permit & Variance for New Self-Storage Facility in the Industrial Zone APPLICANT: Metro Storage, LLC PROPERTY ADDRESS: 1178 Northland Drive ZONING/GUIDED: I-Industrial / I- Industrial ACTION DEADLINE: October 6, 2019 INTRODUCTION Metro Storage LLC is requesting a conditional use permit and variance to develop a new climate controlled self-storage (interior only) facility in the city’s I-Industrial District. The storage facility site is being proposed for the vacant parcel generally located at the southeast corner of Northland Drive and Highway 55, which was recently assigned a new parcel address of 1178 Northland Drive. This planning request item is being presented under a duly noticed public hearing process. A notice of hearing on this item was published in the local Pioneer Press newspaper; and notice letters of this hearing were mailed to all owners within 350-feet of the affected parcel. No comments (or objections) to this request have been received by the city. BACKGROUND As noted in the Applicant’s narrative, Metro Self Storage is a family owned and operated self -storage Company that opened its first mini storage in 1973; and the company has grown to include over 140 facilities in 16 states. Earlier this year, Metro Storage requested consideration of a Zoning Code Amendment to allow self-storage facilities in the Industrial District. At that time, “personal self-storage facility” was listed as one of a few prohibited uses in the I-Zone. The zoning amendment was initially reviewed by the Planning Commission on January 22nd, followed by final consideration at the February 22nd meeting, where a recommendation of denial to this ordinance amendment request was made by the commission. The amendment matter was then reviewed subsequently by the City Council on March 19th, April 23rd, May 7th, and finally May 21st, whereby the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 538, which removed “Personal Self-Storage Facility: from the prohibited list, and allows such uses by means of a conditional use permit in the Industrial District. The subject parcel is a 2.2 acre parcel, zoned and guided I-Industrial District. The property was previously owned and controlled by the neighboring business to the east, General Pump at 1174 Northland Drive. The General Pump facility was built in 1994, and this adjacent parcel was acquired by GP as a future site for business expansion space if needed. This site has remained vacant since 1994 (historic aerial mapping Planning Case 2019-20 Metro Storage CUP-VAR. Page 2 of 13 imagery actually indicates the site as vacant since the mid-1930’s); and was recently sold off by GP to the current owners MH Northland Drive Ventures, LLLP. Pursuant to amended Title 12-1G-1, Metro Storage is allowed to present this development plan for the new self-storage facility under the conditional use permit process. As part of this CUP application, the proposed development requires submittal of a detailed and complete site plan for full consideration by the planning commission and city council. The Applicant has also submitted a Variance to certain floor area ratio (FAR) requirements established in the Industrial District, which will be explained and analyzed later in this report. It should be noted that Metro Storage originally submitted their CUP and Variance applications on June 24, 2019; however, this original application was deemed incomplete, due primarily to the discovery by city staff of a potential wetland on the site. According to Dakota County GIS mapping, the 2011 National Wetland Inventory layer showed a PEM1A wetland on the site. A PEM1A wetland is classified and described as follows: USFWS/NWI Code Classification description Common Description PEM1A Palustrine emergent persistent wetland, temporarily flooded Fresh or interior marsh, persistent vegetation, topographically high The Applicant immediately hired Kjolhaug Environmental Services to inspect and perform a wetland assessment on the subject site; and on August 7th, the city received a Site Assessment report from Kjolhaug that no wetlands were present or delineated on the subject parcel. An excerpt portion of this wetland report is appended. PROJECT DESCRIPTION  Building Plan/Elevations Metro Storage plans to construct a new three-story, 117,810-sf. fully contained, climate controlled, interior only self-storage facility. Exterior of building includes architectural precast panels with multiple finishes to create a pleasing image and break-up the facade. The precast panels will have a 16 foot high base of real brick inserts of two contrasting brick colors to create a strong visual base around the ground story. The building uses a large sized light-colored limestone style precast finish with grooved panel joints breaking up the precast into large block visual elements. The main entry at the northwest corner is highlighted with flat metal panels and extensive glass allowing views into the lobby and upper storage floors. The sides and back walls also include significant additional glass window panels allowing daylight into the building corridors. The included perspective rendering shows the interest the different materials and massing provides, creating a very nice-looking building. A decorative metal canopy is planned for the front entry and at each of the internal drive’s glass overhead door entrances. (SEE IMAGE BELOW) Planning Case 2019-20 Metro Storage CUP-VAR. Page 3 of 13  Site Plan Pursuant to Title 12-1G-7 Site and Structure Requirements for Industrial District uses, the [pertinent] standards are noted below, with responses (in italic print) following each: A. Not more than fifty percent (50%) of the lot area shall be occupied by buildings.  The storage building will have a footprint of 39,270 square feet covering 40.9% of property which is below the 50% maximum building coverage allowed by city code. B. Structure Height: No structure shall exceed forty five feet (45') in height.  Plans call for the building’s roof-line at 42’-6” and up to 44’-6” at the highest pint of the (high) parapet. C. Setbacks: Side Yards Abutting a Street on a Corner Lot: Side yard abutting a street on a corner lot shall be not less than forty feet (40') in width.  The proposed storage facility is setback at 40-ft. from HWY 55 right-of-way line and 40-ft. off Northland Drive ROW line. The “roadway” to the east of the subject site (between the property and General Pump) is not a true roadway ore of a private driveway or access way. The 40-ft. setback is not needed along this east line. F. Floor Area Ratio: Floor area ratio shall not exceed 0.5. FLOOR AREA RATIO (FAR) is the numerical value obtained through dividing the floor area of a building or buildings by the lot area on which such building or buildings are located. In this case the FAR is calculated as follows:  TOTAL BLDG. AREA = 39,270-sf. x 3 = 117,810-sf.  LOT AREA = 2.2 acres or 95,920-sf.  FAR CALC: 117,810 / 95,920 = 1.24%, which is well above the 0.50 standard. The proposed storage facility requires approval of a variance to this standard. G. Minimum Lot Requirements: Lot Area: 1 acre / Lot Width: 100 feet Front Yard Setback: 40-ft. Side Yard Setback: 30-ft. or 40-ft. abutting street Rear Yard 50-ft.  The lot is 3.76 acres and exceeds the 1 acre minimum.  The front lot width dimension is 153-ft. wide along Northland Drive; and 255-ft. along the back MnDOT I-494 ROW. Both dimensions exceed the 100-ft. standard.  Front Yard setback (from Northland Dr.) is 40-ft.  Side Yard (westerly along Hwy 55) is 40-ft. and Easterly SY is 30-ft.  Rear Yard setback is 83’-4”.  Parking/Access Plan The proposed storage facility plans call for the main access to be located near the north end of the facility, coming off the private driveway/access road only. This access will lead customers/visitors to the front main entryway and north access (secure overhead door entryway) into the facility. This area contains six (6) spaces. Farther down the easterly access road, five (5) additional spaces will be provided along the side of the facility. Customers who enter the storage facility will also have access to 11 interior spaces. The new City Code standard for self-storage facility requires one (1) space per 6,000-sf. of storage space. The plan calls for 85,065-sf. of net storage space: CALC: 85,065 / 6,000 = 14.18, or 15 stalls. Planning Case 2019-20 Metro Storage CUP-VAR. Page 4 of 13 Metro Storage proposes 11 exterior stalls and 11 interior stalls, or total of 22-stalls. The rear (south) end of the facility will have a one-way, exit only driveway leading out from the building, and back on to the adjacent private drive/access road. A trash enclosure area is also planned near this back entryway. The enclosure should match the exterior materials of the main building.  Grading/Drainage/Utility Plan The subject site is relatively flat throughout, except for a small 4-5-ft. high earthen berm along the westerly edge (HWY 55 ROW line). The grading plan calls for minimal grading of the site to accommodate the finished floor elevation (FFE) of the proposed building at 894-ft. A small Infiltration Basin #1 is planned on the south side of the building, with drainage swales and inlets to take in stormwater drainage from the private driveway to the east and other hard surfaced areas. The new basin will be tied in to an existing 15-inch storm pipe that leads out to a wetland feature in MnDOT ROW. This basin is also planned to have a rip-rapped emergency outflow (EOF) along the west edge of the basin/swale area in case of abnormal or excessive storm events. Infiltration Basin #2 is an elongated drainage area along the west side of the proposed building. This basin will take Stormwater drainage from the north parking lot area, and roof drains from the building. The storm water management report submitted by the Applicant’s consultants (Rehder & Associates) indicates the required volume control (based on 1.20 acres of proposed impervious surface area), that 4,792 cu. ft. of rate control is needed on this site. The report indicates that Basin #1 provides 2,907 cu. ft. of volume, while Basin #2 provides 4,259 cu. ft. of volume, or 7,166 cu. ft. of total volume provided. The building’s utilities will be tied into the existing (main) service lines underneath Northland Drive to the north. Water service will be provided to the building by a 1 -inch copper service line for typical/potable water needs; and a 6-inch DIP (ductile iron pipe) for fire suppression or interior sprinkler systems. The building’s sanitary service will be provided by a new 6-inch PVC pipe, with a clean-out located at the angled junction of said line. The city’s Public Works Director has reviewed the plans and storm water report, and does not have any issues with this report (or findings) at this time; or placed any additional requirements or conditions related to request.  Landscape Plan Pursuant to Title 12-1G-6, any new development in the Industrial District shall be landscaped with grass, trees, shrubs, or other planted ground cover, in accordance with detailed landscaping plan. Plans call for the removal of a few trees scattered throughout the site. The original submitted landscape plan included a few deciduous trees such as honey locust, hackberry and river birch; with velvet pillar crab trees for ornamentals; Black Hills spruces for evergreen trees; and sumac, spirea, and dogwoods for low-growth shrubs. This original landscape plan was submitted to the city’s recognized master gardeners (Ms. Johnson and Ms. Light), who recommended a few changes to the plan: - substituting ironwood trees for the river birch; - replacing the velvet crabs with serviceberry species; - replace tor spirea bushes with Little Bluestem species; - replace sumacs with honeysuckle, serviceberry, chokeberry, or prairie drop seed grasses; - replace the proposed rock mulch beds with shredded wood mulch; and - substitute the MnDOT 25-121 seed mix with a preferred MnDOT or other native seed mix. Planning Case 2019-20 Metro Storage CUP-VAR. Page 5 of 13 The Landscape Plan was revised and resubmitted, with changes made to the ornamental crabs to serviceberry trees; rock beds are now shown with shredded wood mulch beds, and the seed mix has been revised to a Native Seed Mix #33-261. The Commission may wish to discuss with the Applicant if other substituting (in line with the Master Gardeners recommendations) are warranted, such as replacing the river birch with ironwood; spirea with bluestems; sumac with honeysuckle, serviceberry or chokeberry varieties. This same Code provision also states that “the owner shall have a continuing responsibility to maintain such landscaping and any required screening in reasonable condition at all times.” The plans call for the all new planting areas and lawn areas to be irrigated, which should provide for the daily maintenance and care called for under this ordinance, along with the routine maintenance and care (mowing, weeding, fertilizing, etc.) of the ground by on-site hotel management. City Code also requires a bond in an amount not to exceed one and one -half (11/2) times the cost of landscaping and screening shall be required to guarantee the placement and construction thereof as required in this chapter.  Lighting Plan The lighting plan calls for approx. 21 new “trac wall mount” style lights, which appear to be a downcast/cut- off type light standard mounted along the outer walls of the building., The light plan does not include any new pole lights. Pursuant to Title 12-1I-15, Lights for illuminating parking areas, loading areas or yards for safety and security purposes shall create a reading of no more than 0.2 foot-candle at the shared property line with a commercial or industrial use or public right of way, and shall create a reading of zero foot -candles at the shared property line with residentially zoned property. The photometric (light intensity) plan for the site indicates the new lighting meets these standards, and is approved.  Aircraft Noise Attenuation Pursuant to Title 12-4-1, the City finds that development within certain areas of the city is impacted by aircraft noise; that said noise is beyond the regulatory authority of the city to control; that certain uses of land are inappropriate in areas of high aircraft noise; that some structures do not adequately attenuate aircraft noise resulting in negative impacts on the health, safety and welfare of the residents or inhabitants of the structures; that, through proper construction methods, the means exist to attenuate aircraft noise to interior levels which alleviate such negative impacts; and that the requirements of this chapter are necessary to promote and preserve the health, safety and welfare of the citizens. Review of the Metropolitan Airport Commission’s Noise Contour Map – 2016 indicates the subject site appears to be inside the established “60 DNL” noise contour line. The DNL is defined as: “The day-night sound level, or the twenty four (24) hour equivalent continuous sound level (time averaged A-weighted sound level) from 12:00 midnight to 12:00 midnight, obtained after the addition of ten (10) dBA to sound levels measured from 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM.” Any application for a city building or occupancy permit pertaining to land located in an aircraft noise zone must demonstrate compliance with the provisions of this chapter prior to the issuance of such permit. Per 12-4-7 Noise Compatibility Table (refer to partial table – below), industrial uses located in the 60-70 Actual Noise Contour are noted as “CNST” or Consistent, which is defined as “Acceptable Land Uses” Land Use Type Actual Noise Contour Leq(81+) (76-80) (71-75) (60-70) Industrial, communication, utility 25 CNST CNST CNST Planning Case 2019-20 Metro Storage CUP-VAR. Page 6 of 13 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ANALYSIS Pursuant to Title 12-1L-6, any use allowed by a conditional use permit in a particular zoning district requires submittal of a complete development or site plan for full consideration by the planning commission and city council. The [city] council shall consider the advice and recommendations of the planning commission and the effect of the proposed use upon the health, safety, and welfare of occupants or surrounding lands, existing and anticipated traffic conditions including parking facilities on adjacent streets, and the effect of the proposed use on the comprehensive plan. The City may grant a conditional use provided the proposed use will: a) not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the community, b) nor will cause serious traffic congestion nor hazards, c) nor will seriously depreciate surrounding property value, and d) that the same is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this chapter and the comprehensive plan. A. The proposed use will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the community, nor will cause serious traffic congestion nor hazards, nor will se riously depreciate surrounding property value. Staff Response: The overall general use and purpose of the self-storage facility at this location does not appear to produce any activity, level of service, or production of materials that could be considered detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of the community. Staff is unaware of any negative impacts or impairments attributed to similar commercial storage uses found in other cities, nor discovered any evidence, information or testimony from other cities that these personal storage uses have caused any negative traffic congestion, hazardous situations or depreciated property values due the placement of such facilities next to other commercial or industrial uses. The new storage facility should be compatible with the adjacent commercial and industrial uses in the Industrial Park, including General Pump next door, and the smaller office uses along Northland Drive (south of Mendota Heights Road). The site is being accessed off two separate driveways from what is considered a private driveway/roadway installed by General Pump in 1994. No part of this site will have direct access on to Northland Drive or Highway 55. It is projected the number of trips to and from the self-storage site will be minimal, and will not result in any congestion problems getting in or out of this site or area. B. The proposed use conforms to the general purpose and intent of the city code and comprehensive plan. Staff Response: City Code Title 12-1L-6 Conditional Use states: “The development and execution of this chapter is based upon the division of the city into districts within which the regulations are specified. It is recognized, however, that there are special or conditional uses which, because of their unique characteristics, cannot be properly classified in any district or districts without consideration, in each case, of the impact of those uses on neighboring land or the public need for the particular location. To provide for these needs, the council may by resolution approve a conditional use for those uses and purposes, and may impose conditions and safeguards in such permits to ensure that the purpose and intent of this chapter is carried out.” Planning Case 2019-20 Metro Storage CUP-VAR. Page 7 of 13 As indicated previously, the subject site is located in the Industrial Zone. As part of a proposed Zoning Text Amendment application/request from the same Applicant, city Zoning Code now allows for personal self-storage uses as a conditional use, subject to the following standards: Personal self-storage facility, provided that: A. Any and all storage shall be inside the building. Exterior storage of personal vehicles, recreational vehicles, trailers, and equipment is strictly prohibited. B. The storage facility shall have a security system adequate to limit access to persons renting at the facility. C. Facility shall not be located closer than one-quarter (1/4) mile from any residential use and/or residential zone. D. All drive aisles and parking surfaces must be curb and guttered, with asphalt or concrete. E. The use shall have no more than three (3) overhead doors or bays to be used for entering/exiting the facility. F. Access to any fenced-in exterior area shall be available to emergency responders in a manner acceptable to the fire marshal. G. Common parking space available to all visitors shall be provided at a rate no less than one space per six thousand (6,000) square feet of storage area.  The Applicant has provided a plan that shown no outdoor storage of vehicles will be allowed; all parking areas shall be for customers, visitors or employees at the site.  The facility is accessed only by means through a front door entryway, and through one main overhead roll-up door on the north end, which is opened by a security card or key-pad. Only paid customers or clients will have access to the interior of the facility. Once the door is opened, vehicle enters, the door closes immediately afterwards and the facility is secured again.  The facility is well over 2,000+ feet from Lemay Shores townhome development, and over 1,800+ feet from Hillside Gables (Dakota County workforce housing site off Lexington Avenue).  There are no fenced-in exterior areas planned for this site; all storage will be inside the building. Access to the interior areas of the storage facility will be reviewed and approved by the city’s Building Official and Fire Marshal as part of any new building permit review.  As noted previously, the required parking for the new building is based on the useable storage area of the facility, which in this case is 15-spaces. The Applicant intends to provide 11 exterior and 11 interior spaces for customers/clients. It is Staff’s belief that proposed conditional use for the proposed personal self-storage facility at this location, and specifically to Metro Storage, LLC, conforms to the general purpose and intent of the city code and comprehensive plan, including almost every site and performance standards under the I- Industrial District, except for the required floor area ratio (FAR) requirements, which will be detailed in the Variance analysis below. VARIANCE ANALYSIS Pursuant to City Code Title 12-1G-7 Site and Structure Requirements for the Industrial District, not more than 50% of the lot area shall be occupied by buildings; and the floor area ratio (FAR) shall not exceed 0.5. Floor Area Ratio (FAR) is defined (or determined) as: the numerical value obtained through Planning Case 2019-20 Metro Storage CUP-VAR. Page 8 of 13 dividing the floor area of a building or buildings by the lot area on which such building or buildings are located. In this particular case, the proposed three-story storage facility is 117,810 sq. ft. (39,270 sf. each floor). With a lot area of 2.2 acres, or 95,920-sf., the FAR is calculated as follows: FAR CALC: 117,810 / 95,920 = 1.23 The proposed FAR of 1.23 represents an approximate 250% increase over the 0.5 standard. The Applicant defends this higher FAR request based on the following statement (from their narrative): “While the proposed project meets all the city requirements listed above, we are requesting a variance related to the ordinance Floor Area Ratio (FAR) limit which we believe is not consistent with this newly added Industrial zoning use. Since the building massing, height, and site coverage are within requirements, the only aspect of the building that drives this above the listed FAR is that the building has multiple floors within the building unlike other industrial uses. There is no impact of the added floors from the exterior and due to the very low intensity of this use, there will be less activity than for a single-story building of other approved Industrial uses. This variance is covered in more detail in the Variance Application form submitted.” City Code Section 12-1L-5 governs variance requests. The Planning Commission must consider a number of variables when recommending or deciding on a variance, which generally fall into two categories: (i) practical difficulties; and (ii) impact to the community. The “practical difficulties” test contains three parts: (i) the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not otherwise permitted by the zoning ordinance; (ii) the plight of the property owner is due to circumstances unique to the property, not created by the property owner; and (iii) the variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Also, economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Section 12-1L-5(E)(1) further references other variables the City can consider when granting or denying a variance, noted as follows:  Effect of variance upon health, safety, and welfare of the community.  Existing and anticipated traffic conditions.  Effect on light and air, as well as the danger of fire and the risk to public safety.  Effect on the value of properties in the surrounding area, and upon the Comprehensive Plan.  Granting of the variance is not a convenience to the applicant, but necessary to alleviate a practical difficulty. When considering a variance request, the Planning Commission must determine if these standards have been met in granting a variance, either partially or whole, and provide findings of facts to support such a recommendation to the City Council. If the Planning Commission determines the Applicant has failed to meet these standards, or has not fully demonstrated a reasonableness in the granting of such variance, then findings of fact supporting a recommendation of denial must be determined. As part of any variance request, Applicants are required to prepare and submit their own responses and findings, which for this case are noted below (in italic text): 1. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not otherwise permitted by the zoning ordinance. Applicant’s Response: The proposed project complies with all Site and Structure requirements under 12-1G-7 of the City Zoning Code (as recently amended by City Ordinance 538) for building height, setbacks, building area, lot coverage and parking requirements. However, the floor area ratio (“FAR”) is 1.24. 12-1G-7F of the City Ordinance provides that the FAR shall not exceed 0.5. Thus the FAR for the Planning Case 2019-20 Metro Storage CUP-VAR. Page 9 of 13 Project exceeds City Ordinance requirements. This is a difficulty and is a result of the Project’s comprehensive design that enhances “drive by” aesthetics, customer/occupant safety, property security and the efficient three story horizontal utilization of floor space. The design features of the Project promotes a reasonable use of the property providing a desirable visual appearance along Hwy 55. Since there is a low intense overall use of the property due to nature of the business, the applicant will be able to efficiently use the full building height for vertical storage space, without compromising safety, security or aesthetics. 2. The plight of the property owner is due to circumstances unique to the property, not created by the property owner. Applicant’s Response: The variance request is not due to any property characteristics, but is due to the inconsistency between the Ordinance building area limitation, building height limitation and the FAR limitation, particularly for this recently amended Industrial zoning use. 3. The variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood; and economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Applicant’s Response: The proposed use of the property will have an overall low intensity operational nature and will be consistent with the characteristics of surrounding land uses- to the north and northeast, which are light industrial, office facilities, and office warehouse buildings with parking and landscaped areas. Outside surface parking usage for the Project will be less intense than parking usage at the properties to the north and northeast. The surrounding land uses to the west and south are Highway 55 and Interstate 494. Staff Response: The floor area ratio (FAR) standard is an effective way to calculate the bulk - or mass of building volume on a development site, and is often used in conjunction with other development standards such as building heights, lot coverage and lot area. FAR can sometime assist in a community’s desire to limit over- intensification or over-development of a site. FAR can be used to either limit the intensity of land use to lessen the environmental impacts of development or to control the mass and scale of development. In some cases, calculating a site’s FAR with these other standards, it helps lessen impacts to the site, such as a need for more parking, increased hard surfaces, and additional on-site storm water management systems. From reviewing a number of adjacent city ordinances and their industrial zoning district standards, some have maximum building coverage percentages ranging from a low of 30%-35% (Inver Grove Hts. & Eagan) and up to 50% in West St. Paul. Maximum lot coverage (total i mpervious surface cover) range from 70- 75% up to 90-95% in some cities. Cities of Bloomington and St. Paul allow for uses in certain commercial/business/industrial districts with an FAR from 1.0 to 2.0. For all intents and purposes, most of our suburban neighboring cities do not use or apply the FAR standard to separate industrial uses (business/commercial) in their respective zoning districts. Most of these cities appear to only limit building size (footprint), height and impervious surface percentages. Most of these cities’ height standards seem to range in or around 30-45 feet in height, which could accommodate 3 to 4 story buildings. The Applicant’s plan demonstrates that all other Industrial Zone development and site standards will be met under this plan, including lot size (dimensions), setbacks, height, and building coverage. Because the city allows for buildings in the Industrial district to be up to 45-feet in height, this provides ample opportunity for the Applicant/Developer to provide additional stories and space for this very specific use on this vacant industrial parcel; and which use they pursued to allow such use in this district, and granted approval earlier this year. Planning Case 2019-20 Metro Storage CUP-VAR. Page 10 of 13 Staff would suggest the city give serious consideration to allowing this proposed self-storage use at this location, even with the added FAR, due in part to the fact the proposed use meets many of the other Industrial District standards, and the use will be limited to only this site. Since this proposed use is very new to the community, and a very specific use in this Industrial district, city staff is offering to make a condition that this variance (and related CUP) is only for this personal self- storage use; and shall apply specifically to this site only. Should Metro Storage open and operate the business for a few years, and decide to close down the storage facility and sell-off the property, any future owner(s) or operators of this site would be limited to a self-storage uses only. Any other permitted industrial user that took over the site, would need to comply with current I-Industrial District standards, such as parking and FAR and all others listed under the district’s regulations. ALTERNATIVES for ACTION 1. Recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit and Variance requests, based on the following findings of fact that support the granting of both applications, noted as follows: A. Pursuant to City Code Title 12-1G-2, Metro Storage LLC is allowed to have a personal self-storage facility, provided that: i. Any and all storage shall be inside the building. Exterior storage of personal vehicles, recreational vehicles, trailers, and equipment is strictly prohibited; ii. The storage facility shall have a security system adequate to limit access to persons renting at the facility; iii. Facility shall not be located closer than one-quarter (1/4) mile from any residential use and/or residential zone; iv. All drive aisles and parking surfaces must be curb and guttered, with asphalt or concrete; v. The use shall have no more than three (3) overhead doors or bays to be used for entering/exiting the facility; vi. Access to any fenced-in exterior area shall be available to emergency responders in a manner acceptable to the fire marshal; and vii. Common parking space available to all visitors shall be provided at a rate no less than one space per six thousand (6,000) square feet of storage area. B. The Applicant has demonstrated through their submitted site plan, that the proposed self-storage facility on the subject property either meets or exceeds all of these standards established under Title 12-1G-2 for said use, zone, and is supported by the following findings of facts: i. The proposed self-storage use will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the community, nor will cause serious traffic congestion nor hazards, nor depreciate surrounding property values. ii. The proposed self-storage use conforms to the general purpose and intent of the current City Code and Comprehensive Plan, including all applicable performance standards, except for the floor area ratio requirements, and which requires acceptance and approval of a related variance for such standard, noted herein. iii. The property on which the use will be located is currently in compliance with all applicable city code standards. C. Under Title 12-1L-5A of the City Code, the Council may only grant variances from the strict application of the provisions of the Code in cases where there are “practical difficulties” in carrying out the strict letter of the regulations of the Code. “Practical difficulties” consists of a three -part test: (i) the Applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not otherwise permitted Planning Case 2019-20 Metro Storage CUP-VAR. Page 11 of 13 by the Code; (ii) the plight of the Applicant is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the Applicant; and (iii) the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Economic considerations alone do not constitute “practical difficulties.” D. The Applicant has met the burden of demonstrating the requisite “practical difficulties” in order to justify the granting of a Variance to allow the proposed personal self-storage facility to exceed the floor area ratio requirement of 0.5 for Industrial District uses up to 1.24, based on the following findings: i.) the proposed structure and project complies with all Site and Structure requirements under 12-1G-7 of the City Zoning Code (as recently amended by City Ordinance 538) for building height, setbacks, building area, lot coverage and parking requirements, except for the 0.5 FAR standard, and yet the design features of the Project promotes a reasonable use of the property providing a desirable visual appearance along Hwy 55, since there is a low intense overall use of the property due to nature of the business, the applicant will be able to efficiently use the full building height for vertical storage space, without compromising safety, security or aesthetics. ii.) The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property, due in part to the inconsistency between the Ordinance building area limitation, building height limitation and the FAR limitation, particularly for this recently amended Industrial zoning use; iii.) The variances, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhoods; since the proposed use of the property will have an overall low intensity operational nature and will be consistent with the characteristics of surrounding land uses- to the north and northeast, which are light industrial, office facilities, and office warehouse buildings with parking and landscaped areas. E. The City has considered the factors required by Title 12-1L-5E1 of the City Code, including but not limited to the effect of the Variances upon the health, safety, and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, the effect of the Variance on the danger of fire and the risk to public safety, and upon the value of properties in the surrounding area, and upon the Comprehensive Plan, and has determined this Variance will not affect or pose any negative impacts upon the neighborhood or the community in general. F. Approval of this Variance is only for Metro Storage, LLC, the Applicant as noted herein, and their successors and assigns, and does not apply or give precedential value to any other properties throughout the City. All variances must be applied for separately, provide a project narrative, and present and demonstrate a reasonable need or justification to the City in order to approve a variance. All variance requests must be reviewed independently by City staff and legal counsel under the requirements of the City Code. G. The factual findings and analysis found in the Planning Staff Report for Planning Case No. 2019- 20, dated and presented August 27, 2019 (and on file with the City of Mendota Heights), is hereby fully incorporated into Resolution No. 2019-____. H. The City has the authority to place reasonable conditions upon the property subject to his Variance request. Conditions must be directly related to and roughly proportional to the impact created by the variance. Conditions related to this transaction are as follows: 1. The new storage facility building shall be constructed in conformance to building and site plans certified by a registered architect and/or licensed engineer. 2. Trash enclosure must be made to match the exterior finishes of the principal building. Planning Case 2019-20 Metro Storage CUP-VAR. Page 12 of 13 3. Rooftop mechanical units shall be of a low profile variety. All ground -level and rooftop mechanical utilities, other than low profile rooftop units, shall be completely screened with one or more of the materials used in the construction of the principal structure, to be reviewed by the Planning Department and verified as part of the building permit review process. 4. Final landscaped plan shall be approved by the city staff in cooperation with the city’s Master Gardeners. 5. A performance bond or letter of credit shall be supplied by the applicant in an amount equal to at least one and one-half (11/2) times the value of such screening, landscaping, or other improvements, to be submitted at time of building permit approval. 6. The Developer shall be jointly and severally responsible for the maintenance of all landscaping in a condition presenting a healthy, neat and orderly appearance and free from refuse and debris. Plants and ground cover which are required by an approved site or landscape plan and which have died shall be replaced as soon as seasonal or weather conditions allow. All landscape areas must be irrigated. 7. Building and grading permits shall be obtained from the City prior to construction commencement. 8. All grading and construction activities as part of the proposed development shall be in compliance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations and codes, as well as in compliance with the City’s Land Disturbance Guidance Document. 9. All applicable fire and building codes, as adopted/amended by the City, shall apply and the buildings shall be fully-protected by an automatic fire sprinkler system. 10. All new buildings must comply with the Aircraft Noise Attenuation standards as found under Title 12-4-1 of City Code. 11. Any new sign(s) proposed under this development plan must meet the standards of City Code Title 12-1D-15: Signs. 12. The conditional use permit for the personal self-storage facility and the related variance allowing the new building to exceed the required floor area ratio standard of 0.5 to 1.24, is only for the Applicant - Metro Storage, LLC, its subsidiaries and assigns of the property and all future owners of the subject property, provided the site is used exclusively as a personal self-storage facility. Any other permitted use or use by conditional use permit shall be made complaint with all current I-Industrial District zoning and site development standards at that time. 2. Recommend denial of the Variance request, based on the findings of fact that confirm the Applicant failed to meet the burden(s) of proof or standards in granting of the variance requested herein, noted as follows: A. Under Title 12-1L-5A of the City Code, the City may only grant variances from the strict application of the provisions of the Code in cases where there are “practical difficulties” in carrying out the strict letter of the regulations of the Code. “Practical difficulties” consists of a three -part test: (i) the Applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not otherwise permitted by the Code; (ii) the plight of the Applicant is due to circumstances unique to the property not Planning Case 2019-20 Metro Storage CUP-VAR. Page 13 of 13 created by the Applicant; and (iii) the variance, if grant ed, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Economic considerations alone do not constitute “practical difficulties.” B. The City hereby determines the Applicant has not fully met the burden of demonstrating the requisite “practical difficulties” in order to justify the granting of this Variance to exceed the floor area ratio requirement of 0.5 for Industrial District uses; and therefore the City hereby finds the proposed personal self-storage project is not essential to the overall enjoyment and continued use of the property; and there are other alternatives on the property due to its large size; and is therefore not considered a reasonable use of the property. C. Because the City finds that the first prong of the three -part test (reasonable use of the property) is not met by the Applicant, the City need not consider the remaining two prongs of the test (unique circumstances of the property and essential character of the neighborhood). 3. Table the request and direct staff to extend the application review period an additional 60 days, in compliance with MN STAT. 15.99. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission give careful consideration of the Conditional Use Permit and Variances to be considered for this new self-storage facility; and if the Commission wishes to approve the CUP and Variance as presented herein, or add/modify the conditions as noted herein, you may choose Alternative No. 1 as noted above. If the Commission wishes to deny the Variance related to the excess FAR standard, you should choose Alternative No. 2, which denies the CUP and Variance applications together, with findings indicated under this alternative. If the Commission feels more information is needed or required, or that these plans should be modified to meet the City Code without a variance, you can elect to table this matter and ask the Applicant to revise their plans accordingly; or direct staff to research or provide additional information at a future meeting in order to satisfactorily complete a recommendation. I-494I-35EHWY 5 5 494 RAMPI- 3 5 E RAMP I-94 RAMPMENDOTA HEIGHTS RD NORT HL AND DRTRAPP RD 494 LOOPI-35E LOOPLEXINGTON AVELEMAY LAKE RD S E R VIC E R D W E A G A N D A L E B LV D 494 RAMPI-494 I -35E RAMPI-35E RAMPI-35EH WY 5 5 I-94 RAMP494 L O O P 1178 NORTHLAND DRIVE Metro Storage Site City of Mendota Heights0390 SCALE IN FEETDate: 8/7/2019 GIS Map Disclaimer:This data is for informational purposes only and should not be substituted for a true title search, property appraisal, plat,survey, or for zoning verification. The City of Mendota Heights assumes no legal responsibility for the information containedin this data. The City of Mendota Heights, or any other entity from which data was obtained, assumes no liability for any errorsor omissions herein. If discrepancies are found, please contact the City of Mendota Heights. Contact "Gopher State One Call" at 651-454-0002 for utility locations, 48 hours prior to any excavation. 9 8 0 4 3 9 2 8 0 4 0 1 255185 1681 7 1 8 3 100531571 7 8 2 0 0 1 0 1001001 0 1174 1196 1171 HWY 5 5 I-4 9 4494 R A M P N O R TH LA N D D R HWY 5 5 1178 NORTHLAND DRIVE Metro Storage Site City of Mendota Heights090 SCALE IN FEETDate: 8/7/2019 GIS Map Disclaimer:This data is for informational purposes only and should not be substituted for a true title search, property appraisal, plat,survey, or for zoning verification. The City of Mendota Heights assumes no legal responsibility for the information containedin this data. The City of Mendota Heights, or any other entity from which data was obtained, assumes no liability for any errorsor omissions herein. If discrepancies are found, please contact the City of Mendota Heights. Contact "Gopher State One Call" at 651-454-0002 for utility locations, 48 hours prior to any excavation. 7300 WEST 147TH STREETSUITE 504APPLE VALLEY, MN 55124-7580(952) 431-4433 June 23, 2019 Project Narrative: Metro Self Storage – Mendota Heights . The Metro Self Storage project is a new 3-story climate-controlled facility proposed for Northland Plaza in Mendota Heights. Metro Self Storage is a family owned and operated self-storage company that opened its first mini storage in 1973. The company has grown to include over 140 facilities in 16 states and prides itself in providing the best storage experience in the industry. The project site is accessed off Northland Drive on its north property line and abuts Highway 55 on the west and Interstate 494 on the south. The property is a 2.2 acre remaining site within this otherwise developed area. The property is zoned I - Industrial as are the properties surrounding the site except for a strip of B3 – General Business properties to the north. The storage building will have a footprint of 39,270 square feet covering 40.9% of property which is below the 50% maximum building coverage allowed by ordinance. There is 45,014 square feet of green space providing 46.9% landscaped area proposed for this site. The landscape plan indicates a variety of overstory trees, ornamental trees and shrubs to provide interest and emphasize elements of the building design. Exterior of building includes architectural precast panels with multiple finishes to create a pleasing image and break-up the facade. The precast panels will have a 16 foot high base of real brick inserts of two contrasting brick colors to create a strong visual base around the ground story Above this base the building uses a large sized light-colored limestone style precast finish with grooved panel joints breaking up the precast into large block visual elements. The light-colored panels are also broken up with a rhythm of slightly higher full brick panels many of which include additional glass windows creating aesthetic interest along each façade. The main entry at the northwest corner is highlighted with flat metal panels and extensive glass allowing views into the lobby and upper storage floors. The sides and back walls also include significant additional glass window panels allowing daylight into the building corridors. The included perspective rendering shows the interest the different materials and massing provides, creating a very nice-looking building. Along with this we have provided a decorative metal canopy at the front entry and at each of the internal drive’s glass overhead door entrances. The civil engineering drawings indicate the grading, paving and drainage approach for the project. The stormwater design collects rainwater from the roof and pavement into below grade stormwater piping. This stormwater will be piped to the west stormwater infiltration pond which along with the other stormwater pond on the site are designed to infiltrate all new impervious surface areas. Consequently, no additional stormwater will leave this site above the minor previously approved flow from the adjacent property. Pavement and curb design are also included in these drawings along with utility connections. The site access is off Northland Drive just east of Highway 55 entering on the existing shared private drive serving the property to the east. The first entry of this private drive leads to a parking lot at the front of the building near the office entry and the entrance to an internal one-way drive- through access down the middle of the storage building. This internal drive allows clients to enter and park in the climate-controlled area while they load or unload items from their storage unit. Self-storage is a very low traffic producer compared to any other commercial business that would otherwise be considered on this Industrial zoned site. Consequently, there is a very small demand for parking stalls, typically with only a few clients visiting the facility at any given time. There is room inside the building for 11 parallel parking stalls. Added to this are 10 exterior stalls on the north and east sides of the building resulting in a total of 21 stalls. This is 6 stalls more than the ordinance minimum 15 stall requirement. The leasing office for the facility will be in the northwest corner of the building with parking immediately adjacent for customers to access the office. First time customers would park at the office and lease a unit. On subsequent visits customers would pull into the building through the north entry overhead door leading to the interior drive-through lane, access their storage unit, and then exit at the south side. The facility will be staffed by a Property Manager (PM) everyday with weekday hours being 9:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. and shorter on the weekend. Other employees will be a Storage Consultant (SC) and a Maintenance Technician (MT). Each customer will have a proprietary PIN number to access the facility. Facility access hours are from 6 a.m. until 10 p.m. The building will be automatically locked down at that point and no further access can be achieved. The access system keeps daily records of all entries. The facility will also be monitored by 16 security cameras that are accessed by the PM in the office as well as being able to be viewed from a web-based platform by management. Cameras will cover virtually all public areas of the building. The site lighting will include all new highly efficient LED light fixtures with moderate lighting levels appropriate for this use. All light fixtures are building mounted, fully shielded, dark sky compliant and provide strong cut-off at the lot edges. While the proposed project meets all the city requirements listed above, we are requesting a variance related to the ordinance Floor Area Ratio (FAR) limit which we believe is not consistent with this newly added Industrial zoning use. Since the building massing, height, and site coverage are within requirements, the only aspect of the building that drives this above the listed FAR is that the building has multiple floors within the building unlike other industrial uses. There is no impact of the added floors from the exterior and due to the very low intensity of this use, there will be less activity than for a single-story building of other approved Industrial uses. This variance is covered in more detail in the Variance Application form submitted. In conclusion, the proposed new Metro Self Storage facility provides for an attractive building and landscaped site to meet the storage needs of Mendota Heights residents. With the very low traffic generation and activity associated with this proposed use, this climate-controlled self-storage facility will fit well into this commercial neighborhood. On behalf of Metro Self Storage, we are pleased to have this opportunity to bring this new business to Mendota Heights. Sincerely, Quinn S. Hutson, AIA, LEED AP Principal CNH Architects, Inc. Variance Application (2019) Page 1 of 3 VARIANCE APPLICATION – CHECKLIST & RESPONSE FORM Applications will be scheduled for consideration by the Planning Commission and/or City Council only after all required materials have been submitted. Application submittal deadlines are available on the City’s website or by contacting the City Planner. Late or incomplete applications will not be put on the agenda. Office Use Only: Case #:_____________________ Applicant:____________________ Address:_____________________ The City Council may grant variances from the strict application of the provisions of the City Code and impose conditions and safeguards in the variances so granted in cases where there are practical difficulties in carrying out the strict letter of the regulations of the Code. "Practical difficulties", as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this chapter; the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Please consider these requirements carefully before requesting a variance. APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS: Electronic and hard copies of all the required materials must be submitted according to the current application submittal schedule. Submit 1 electronic copy and 2 hard copies (full-size/to-scale) of all required plans. The following materials must be submitted for the application to be considered complete: Fee, as included in current Fee Schedule (check payable to City of Mendota Heights). NOTE: Planning Application fees do not cover building permit fees, utilities, or other fees which may be required to complete the project. Completed Application Form(s). Letter of Intent. Required Plans. APPLICANT MUST CHECK ALL APPLICABLE ITEMS INCLUDED IN THE SUBMITTAL Sketch Plan (to-scale drawing or certified survey, if determined necessary): Location and setbacks of all buildings on the property in question including both existing and proposed structures. Location of any easements having an influence upon the variance request. Written consent and waiver of public hearing, in a form prescribed by the city, by the owners of property within one hundred feet (100') of the boundaries of the property for which the 2019-20 Metro Storage LLC Variance Application (2019) Page 2 of 3 variance is requested, accompanied by a map indicating the location of the property in question and the location of the property owners who have given consent; or, lacking such consent, a list of names and addresses of the owners of property within one hundred feet (100') of the boundaries of the property for which the variance is requested. If topography or extreme grade is the basis on which the request is made, all topographic contours shall be submitted. If the application involves a cutting of a curb for a driveway or grading a driveway, the applicant shall have his plan approved by the city public works director prior to construction. Please complete the attached questions regarding your request. Responses will be presented to the Planning Commission & City Council. __________________________________________________________________ Please answer the following three questions as they relate to the variance request. (Note: you may fill-in this form or create your own) 1.Are there any practical difficulties that help support the granting of this variance? (Note: “practical difficulties" as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by City Code. Economic considerations along do not constitute a practical difficulty). YES NO Please describe or identify any practical difficulties and/or how you plan to use the property in a reasonable manner below: Variance Application (2019) Page 3 of 3 2.Are there any circumstances unique to the property (not created by the owner) that support the granting of this variance? YES NO Please describe or identify any unique circumstances below: 3.If the variance was granted, would it alter the essential character of the neighborhood? YES NO Why or Why Not? Please explain how the request fits with the character of the neighborhood. The City Council must make affirmative findings on all of the criteria listed above in order to grant a variance. The applicant for a variance has the burden of proof to show that all of the criteria listed above have been demonstrated or satisfied. 26105 Wild Rose Lane, Shorewood, Minnesota 55331, Phone: 952-401-8757, Fax: 952-401-8798 Memorandum Date: August 7, 2019 To: Krista Spreiter, City of Mendota Heights Project Manager, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) CC: Quinn Hutson, Applicant Ben Ford, Rehder & Associates From: Melissa Barrett, Kjolhaug Environmental Services Company (KES) Re: Site Assessment for Wetlands – 1178 Northland Drive, Mendota Heights, MN The 1178 Northland Drive site was examined on July 26, 2019 for the presence and extent of wetland. The site was located in Section 34, Township 28N, Range 23W, Mendota Heights, Dakota County, Minnesota. The 2.2-acre site was located immediately northeast of the intersection of Highway 55 and Interstate 494, and just south of Northland Drive (Figure 1) and corresponded to Dakota County PID 275225001040 and the address of 1178 Northland Drive. The site was a vacant parcel (Figure 2) with a few irrigation faucets observed in the central portion. The site was primarily a meadow with Siberian elm trees scattered throughout and sumac along the west and south perimeters. Meadow species observed included Kentucky bluegrass, smooth brome, bird’s-foot trefoil, Canada goldenrod, giant goldenrod, knapweed, Canada thistle, bittersweet nightshade, curly dock, common burdock, crown vetch, and common milkweed. Scattered clumps of reed canary grass were also present but were not associated with depressions. Topography on the site was level/flat, except for two slightly higher areas along the south boundary. Along the west site boundary, topography sloped downhill to the west. Review of NWI, Soils, DNR, and NHD Information The National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) (Minnesota Geospatial Commons 2009-2014 and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) showed a PEM1A wetland in the west portion of the site (Figure 3). The Soil Survey (USDA NRCS 2015) did not show any mapped hydric soil types within or near site boundaries. Soil types mapped on and near the property are listed in Table 1 and a map showing soil types is included in Figure 4. Table 1. Soil types mapped on the 1178 Northland Drive site. Symbol Soil Name Approx. Acres AOI Approx. % of AOI % Hydric Hydric Category 39B2 Wadena loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes, eroded 1.4 40.90% 0 Not Hydric 39C2 Wadena loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes, moderately eroded 2.1 59.10% 0 Not Hydric The Minnesota DNR Public Waters Inventory (Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 2015) did not show any DNR Public Waters, Wetlands, or Watercourses within or near site boundaries (Figure 5). The National Hydrography Dataset (U.S. Geological Survey 2015) did not show any surface water features within or near site boundaries (Figure 6). No Wetland Determination The site was examined on July 26, 2019 for the presence and extent of wetlands. The NWI map showed a PEM1A wetland in the west portion of the site (Area A – Figure 2). At the time of the July 26 site visit, Area A was flat (not depressional) and was dominated by meadow species as described previously. A sample point (SPA – Attachment A) taken within a portion of Area A caontaining a dominant amount of reed canary grass showed a soil profile that had been stripped of the A horizon and that lacked moisture or free water to a depth of 24 inches. Based on the lack of hydric soil and the lack of primary or secondary wetland hydrology indicators, Area A was determined to be non-wetland. No other areas were shown as wetland on the NWI-map, and no other areas were shown as hydric on the soil survey. No depressions were observed on the site. Summary No wetlands were delineated on the 1178 Northland Drive site in Mendota Heights. Attachment B of this memo includes a Joint Application Form for Activities Affecting Water Resources in Minnesota, which is submitted in request for: (1) concurrence with the no wetland determination from the City of Mendota Heights under the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (WCA), and (2) concurrence from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) that the site lacks waters of the U.S. for Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act. Thank you. Comm. No.: Date: Metro Self Storage -Perspective View 19051 06/24/19 S id e y a rd to a S tre e t4 0 ' - 0 "33' - 0"Fr ont yar d40' - 0"10' - 0"Pa r k i n g Se t b a c kBu il d i n g Se t b a c k B u ild in g S e tb a c kParking Set backPr oper t y Li ne80' - 0"75' - 0"70' - 0"55' - 0" 2 5 ' - 0 "1 1 0 ' - 0 "1 0 ' - 0 "Gross Area (footprint) = 39,270 s.f. x 3 = 117,810 s.f. R e te n tio n P o n d Proposed 3 Story BuildingDr i ve t hr u5 5 ' - 0 "2 5 ' - 0 "3 0 ' - 0 "HC 6 3 L O A D IN G H i g h w a y 5 5N o r t h l a n d D r i v e I n t e r s t a t e 4 9 4 11 Pr o p e rt y L i n e I nf i l t r at i on PondTrash73' - 0"287' - 0"33' - 4" 4 0 ' - 0 "1 6 2 ' - 0 "1 0 ' - 0 "Rear y ar d50' - 0" Existing Building Monument sign E x it -O n e W a y20' - 0" 2 2 0 ' - 0 "Site Statistics: Site Area 95,920 SF 2.2 Acres Setback Statistics: Building Setback -Front Yard to Street 40 Feet Building Setback -Side Yard to Street 40 Feet Building Setback -Side Yard 30 Feet Building Setback -Rear Yard 50 Feet Parking Setbacks 10/20 Feet Building Area Statistics: Proposed Building Area 39,270 SF Proposed Building Area Coverage 40.9 % Maximum Building Area Coverage Allowed 50.0 % Lot Coverage Statistics: Total Site Impervious Area (Parking & Walks)11,640 SF Total Proposed Building Area 39,270 SF Total Proposed Landscape Coverage 45,010 SF Total Proposed Landscape Coverage %46.9 % Parking Statistics: Parking Required (Personal Self-Storage)15 stalls 85,065 SF Net Storage Area / 6,000 SF per stall Parking Provided Exterior 11 stalls Interior (parallel along internal one-way aisle 11 stalls Total Stalls Provided 22 stalls FAR -by Ordinance 0.5 FAR -Proposed 1.24 Pr oper t y Li neProposed 3 Story Building H i g h w a y 5 5N o r t h l a n d I n t e r s t a t e 4 9 4Pr o p e rt y L i n e Existing Building Existing Building Existing Building D r i v e 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 A B C D E F G H J K L M A B C D E F G H J K L M © COPYRIGHT BY CNH ARCHITECTS, INC.7300 WEST 147TH STREET SUITE 504 APPLE VALLEY, MN 55124-7580 (952) 431-4433CNH NO.: 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 151 REVISIONS: DATE:C:\Users\TJordan\Documents\19051 - Metro Storage Mendota Heights_tjordan.rvt8/9/2019 1:58:43 PMCITY SUBMITTAL -Rev 1 CS01Preliminary Site PlanMetro Self Storage1178 Northland DriveMendota Heights, MN 5512019051 06/24/19 1" = 30'-0"CS01 2 Schematic Overall Site Plan 1 08/08/19 Revised Submittals 1" = 80'-0"CS01 1 Area Plan w Neighboring Buildings 1 1 1 1 1 Floor 1 100' -0" Floor 2 116' -0" Floor 3 128' -0" T.O. Parapet 142' -6" High Parapet 144' -6" Precast wall panel with thin brick, dark Precast wall panel, smooth finish Precast wall panel with thin brick, medium Lighted box sign, maximum 100 s.f. Suspended canopy with recessed can lights, typical Aluminum and glass sectional door LED wall pack light, full cut-off Floor 1 100' -0" Floor 2 116' -0" Floor 3 128' -0" T.O. Parapet 142' -6" High Parapet 144' -6" Precast wall panel with thin brick, dark Precast wall panel, smooth finish Precast wall panel with thin brick,medium Aluminum storefront windowPrecast wall panel, smooth finish LED wall pack light, full cut-off Suspended canopy with recessed can lights, typical Floor 1 100' -0" Floor 2 116' -0" Floor 3 128' -0" T.O. Parapet 142' -6" High Parapet 144' -6" Precast wall panel with thin brick, dark Precast wall panel, smooth finish Precast wall panel with thin brick, medium Aluminum storefront window Flush metal panels Aluminum storefront window Precast wall panel, smooth finish Precast wall panel, smooth finish Rooftop unit, screened Lighted box sign, maximum 100 s.f. LED wall pack light, full cut-off Floor 1 100' -0" Floor 2 116' -0" Floor 3 128' -0" T.O. Parapet 142' -6" High Parapet 144' -6" Precast wall panel with thin brick, dark Precast wall panel, smooth finish Precast wall panel with thin brick, medium Suspended canopy with recessed can lights, typical Rooftop unit, screened Flush metal panels Aluminum storefront window system Aluminum and glass sectional door LED wall pack light, full cut-off Exterior Material -Area Percentages (%) Precast -Smooth Finish 46 % Thin Brick -Dark Color Thin Brick -Medium Color Metal & Glass 25 % 17 % 12 % 100 % 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 A B C D E F G H J K L M A B C D E F G H J K L M © COPYRIGHT BY CNH ARCHITECTS, INC.7300 WEST 147TH STREET SUITE 504 APPLE VALLEY, MN 55124-7580 (952) 431-4433CNH NO.: 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 151 REVISIONS: DATE:C:\Users\TJordan\Documents\19051 - Metro Storage Mendota Heights_tjordan.rvt6/24/2019 11:17:58 AMCITY SUBMITTAL CS02Exterior ElevationsMetro Self StorageHighway 55 and Northland DriveMendota Heights, MN 5512019051 06/24/19 1/16" = 1'-0"CS02 1 South Elevation 1/16" = 1'-0"CS02 4 East Elevation 1/16" = 1'-0"CS02 3 West Elevation 1/16" = 1'-0"CS02 2 North Elevation CS021 CS02 2 CS02 4 CS02 3 80' - 0"5' - 0"70' - 0"5' - 0"120' - 0"15' - 0"5' - 0"35' - 0"25' - 0"30' - 0"25' - 0"Drive aisle Office/ Reception Parking ( 11 stalls ) Trash 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 A B C D E F G H J K L M A B C D E F G H J K L M © COPYRIGHT BY CNH ARCHITECTS, INC.7300 WEST 147TH STREET SUITE 504 APPLE VALLEY, MN 55124-7580 (952) 431-4433CNH NO.: 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 151 REVISIONS: DATE:C:\Users\TJordan\Documents\19051 - Metro Storage Mendota Heights_tjordan.rvt6/24/2019 11:16:59 AMCITY SUBMITTAL CS03Schematic Floor PlanMetro Self StorageHighway 55 and Northland DriveMendota Heights, MN 5512019051 06/24/19 1/16" = 1'-0"CS03 1 First Floor Plan 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 A B C D E F G H J K L M A B C D E F G H J K L M © COPYRIGHT BY CNH ARCHITECTS, INC.7300 WEST 147TH STREET SUITE 504 APPLE VALLEY, MN 55124-7580 (952) 431-4433CNH NO.: 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 151 REVISIONS: DATE:C:\Users\TJordan\Documents\19051 - Metro Storage Mendota Heights_tjordan.rvt6/24/2019 11:32:23 AMCITY SUBMITTAL CS04LightingMetro Self StorageHighway 55 and Northland DriveMendota Heights, MN 5512019051 06/21/19 12" = 1'-0"CS04 3 Light Contour Map 1" = 1'-0"CS04 1 Lighting Wall Pack 1" = 1'-0"CS04 2 Lighting Recessed