2013-06-18 Council Workshop Garages, ArenaCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
CITY COUNCIL GOALSETTING
WORKSHOP AGENDA
June 18, 2013 — 5:30 p.m.
Mendota Heights City Hall
1. Call to Order
2. West St. Paul /Sibley Hockey Arena Task Force Proposal
3. Ordinance 454, Garage Code Amendment Discussion
4. Adjourn
ir•o•-••••-
mCITY OF
MENDOTA HEIGHTS
1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights, Mr
651.452.1850 phone 651.452.8940 f,
www.mendota- heights.com
page 2
DATE: June 18, 2013
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Justin Miller, City Administrator
SUBJECT: West St. Paul /Sibley Hockey Arena Task Force Proposal
BACKGROUND
2
Recently the City of West St. Paul began approaching surrounding communities and the school
district about exploring the idea of constructing a new ice arena. The current arena, which is
owned and operated by the City of West St. Paul, is in need of significant repairs and there are
currently no plans to complete the needed upgrades. The arena is used by the Sibley hockey
teams as well as youth associations, which in part include Mendota Heights residents.
With the recommendation of Senator Metzen, the City of West St. Paul contacted the Minnesota
Amateur Sports Commission (MASC). They have in the past assisted communities in
conducting feasibility studies for ice arenas, including those that utilize multiple partners (cities,
counties, school districts).
Attached is a proposal for creating a Sibley Area Hockey Arena Study Task Force that would
look at youth hockey needs in the area as well as exploring potential funding options. At this
time the City of Mendota Heights is only being asked whether or not to participate in the task
force.
If the council wishes to proceed, there should be a discussion about who should be the city's
designated representative to the task force.
At the request of Councilmember Duggan, also attached to this memo is a report produced for
the City of West St. Paul that they used for discussion purposes before constructing their new
sports dome. This report was not completed by the MASC, so the report for the ice arena will
most likely come in a different format.
BUDGET IMPACT
Serving on the task force itself will not have a budget impact. Any construction or operation
considerations coming out of the task force would need to be carefully looked at and analyzed as
part of future budget considerations.
page 3
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Mendota Heights City Council review the attached proposal and
discuss whether to participate in the Sibley Area Hockey Arena Task Force.
page 4
DRAFT
Sibley Area Ice Arena Study Task Force
Purpose:
To study the feasibility of developing an indoor ice arena to replace the eventual closure of the
West St. Paul Ice Arena.
The task force may make one of the following determinations:
1. It is not feasible to develop a new ice arena.
2. It is feasible to develop a single sheet arena.
3. It is feasible to develop a two sheet arena.
Who:
representatives from the following governmental units will be invited to serve on the task
force:
Mendota Heights
West St. Paul
Sunfish Lake
Lillydale
Mendota
Eagan
ISD #197
Voting:
In consideration of population and number of arena users, the task force will employ a
weighted voting for task force decisions as follows:
Mendota Heights 40%
West St. Paul 40%
Sunfish Lake 6%
Mendota 1%
Lillydale 1%
Eagan 2%
ISD #197 10%
State Technical Assistance:
Senator Metzen has recommended that the Minnesota Amateur Sports Commission (MASC)
offer technical assistance at no cost to the communities.
Study Topics:
The MASC recommends that the task force authorize the MASC to do the following research:
1. Conduct a user demand study:
page 5
a. What is the number of users and what are the ice time needs of the current
and future Sibley area arena users.
b. What is the demand from neighboring communities.
2. Identify the best location — with task force member participation
3. Conduct a preliminary economic impact study.
a. Single sheet arena
b. Two sheet arena.
4. Identify construction cost estimates.
a. Single sheet arena.
b. Two sheet arena.
5. Identify financing options.
6. Conduct a financial feasibility for operating the proposed arena.
a. Single sheet arena.
b. Two sheet arena.
7. Identify options for the operating entity:
a. Non - profit organization.
b. Single city owner and operator.
c. Joint powers agreement.
d. Other.
Timetable:
It is anticipated that the task force would meet four times per year and may conduct special
meetings if needed. The first meeting could be held in August /September of 2013. It is
estimated that the task force would take one year to fully assess the study questions and
determine the level of community support or lack thereof.
COMMUNITY LEADERSHIP MEETINGS
June, 2013
TOPIC:
page 6
Meeting the recreational ice sport needs for the communities of Mendota Heights, Sunfish Lake
and West St. Paul.
CHALLENGE:
The West St. Paul Ice Arena was established in 1972 and has been serving the ice hockey, figure
skating and recreational ice skating needs for the communities of Mendota Heights, Sunfish
Lake, West St. Paul and a small part of Eagan and ISD #197 High School teams for over 41 years.
The West St. Paul Ice Arena is aging and requires major repairs. The City Council has
determined that it is not cost effective to repair the arena.
While the West St. Paul Arena is currently still operating, it is one major repair away from being
closed permanently.
THE SOLUTION:
Once the arena is closed, what is the best solution to serve the youth and adult skaters from
Mendota Heights, Sunfish Lake, ISD #197 and West St. Paul?
Where is the best location for the new arena?
What should be included in the new arena? One or two sheets?
What is the best solution to finance the new arena and who should be responsible to help pay
for the new arena?
What is the best solution to operate the new arena?
Background: Currently the users of the West St. Paul Arena come from the following
communities: Mendota Heights 72 %, West St. Paul 20 %, and Sunfish
Lake /Eagan /Lilydale /Mendota 8 %.
OFFER OF ASSISTANCE
Senator Jim Metzen has recommended that the Minnesota Amateur Sports Commission
(MASC) offer its assistance to the communities to find a solution.
The MASC is a state agency with extensive experience in ice arena development.
The MASC led the effort to put together a partnership of 10 cities and two counties to develop
the highly successful Schwan Super Rink in Blaine, MN. The Schwan Super Rink has eight sheets
of ice and is the largest ice arena in the world.
page 7
Memo
To: Sherrie Le — Acting City Manager, City of West St. Paul
From: Stacie Kvilvang and Bruce Kimmel
Date: May 25, 2012
Subject: Sports Dome Analysis
Introduction
The City asked Ehlers to perform an independent evaluation of the proposal to construct a
new Sports Dome on the City owned land adjacent to City Hall. The scope of this analysis
is threefold:
1. Review with staff estimated operating costs for the facility, funding available for the
project, revenue assumptions and signed contracts and prepare financing options;
2. Develop a model to provide the City the ability to complete sensitivity analysis of any
changes (costs, revenues, expenses) to assist in evaluating the fiscal costs and
benefits associated with the sports dome;
3. Summarize key policy questions, and possible development timelines for City
consideration.
Our analysis does not conclude with a "go / no go" recommendation; only the City is in a
position to weigh both the quantitative and qualitative aspects of the proposal in deciding
whether this Sports Dome will be a good investment for the City.
Sources and Uses of Funds
The sources and uses of funds shown on the following page are based upon actual
construction bids received and City funds currently available for the project:
page 8
SOURCES
% OF TOTAL
TOTALS
City Financing - Abatement Bonds
73.48%
5,125,000
Cash - Equipment Replacement Fund
14.34%
1,000,000
Cash - General Fund
7.17%
500,000
Cash - Park Dedication Fees
3.58%
250,000
Cash - Technology Fund
1.43%
100,000
TOTAL
100.00%
6,975,000
USES
Construction
89.85%
6,267,000
Design/Development
2.11%
147,460
Furniture /Fixtures
1.62%
113,100
Financing Costs
3.73%
260,440
Marketing
0.86%
60,000
Construction Management
1.82%
127,000
TOTAL
100.00%
6,975,000
The City would be financing the majority of the project (approximately 73 %), with the
remainder coming from other City funds. It should be noted that the use of the $1 million
from the Equipment Replacement Fund has been discussed at several work sessions with
the City Council and has been assumed to be available for this project. The additional
$850,000 of funds (General Fund, Park Fund and Technology Fund) are new sources
identified by staff as being available to assist in reducing the amount of debt for the project.
The use of these funds is at the discretion of the Council. It should be noted that for every
$100,000 in funds the Council choses to utilize for the project reduces the annual gap /levy
by approximately $10,000.
Revenues
Annual revenues are estimated to be approximately $500,000 as shown in the table below:
Revenue Source
Amount
Sports Complex
Field (November - April) - Signed Contracts
Field (November - April) - Identified But Not Yet Contracted
Field (November - April) - TBD
Batting Cages (3 @$30 /Hour for 360 Hours)
Advertising
Dome Banner - 5 10' banners @ $500
Vending
Vending Machines
$ 412,750
$ 27,750
$ 44,300
$ 10,800
$ 2,500
$ 1,900
Total Revenue
$ 500,000
In the estimates above the actual field hours rented total 3,738 hours (first 2 line items).
These do not account for all prime rental hours that are available and the amount of field
time to be rented that is categorized as TBD will not consume the remaining prime hours.
page 9
Based upon current signed contracts and users identified but not yet contracted, following is
a breakdown of the annual revenue generated by each and °A) of overall revenue:
Sports Dome Revenue By User
$
141,050
$125,1[70
$fit a00 5>> n>>
$25,100
$1,050 $5,000 I $4,77S ■ $1[1,50[1
`ps �� e��' sec e e of eel
g4 Jt i��
AF .a tic
o`3' 'f
LaCrosse
Minneapolis United pg6 Women's soccer
2% i % 1%
CGerver 5G[[[r
1%
Wes[ 51 Paul Athletic
Association
31%
Mn Thunder Academy
7.11%
Sports Dome Users By % of Total Revenue
Go Sports Lite
F7i
As noted in the charts above, the largest user is the West St. Paul Athletic Association,
followed by MN Thunder Academy, which comprise nearly 60% of the annual revenue.
Operating Costs
Operating costs pay for salaries to run the facility, facility expenses (i.e. utilities, insurance,
supplies, sales tax, etc.) and replacement reserves. Below are the estimated operational
costs for the facility:
OPERATING EXPENSES 2018
SALARIES
Staff and Marketing
OTHER EXPENSES AND FEES
Building Operational Expenses
Replacement Reserves ($560,000 by year 10/$910,000 by year 15)
$138,798
$163,243
$ 70,000
TOTAL EXPENSES
$372,041
only $30,000 in year 1 and 2,
$40,000 in year 3, $50,000 in
year 4, $60,000 in year 5 and
$70,000 in years 7 -20
Year 6 of the facility is shown for operating costs since this is the first year in which
replacement reserves "peak" at the full annual amount to be set aside. By setting aside
replacement reserves on an annual basis for this project, the City will have adequate dollars
available to pay for the majority of the costs associated with replacement of the turf and roof
when required (expected in years 20 to 23).
page 10
Debt Financing
The City is able to issue Tax Abatement Bonds to finance the expected 73% of project
costs. For the analysis, we have assumed 50 percent of the financing will be taxable and
50 percent will be tax exempt, which provides the City with flexibility on whom the end users
of the facility are. Based upon a bond amount of $5,125,000, the annual debt service will
be approximately $375,000.
Debt service (payment) on these bonds will be from revenues generated from the facility,
net of operational costs, and a tax levy. Based upon the proposed revenues, operating
costs and debt service costs, below is the estimated annual levy requirement in years 1 -6
(Cash Flow After Financing):
CASH FLOW - WITHOUT INFLATION 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Revenue
Expenses
NET OPERATING INCOME
Debt Service (Interest Only In 2014)
500,000
290,543
209,457
0
500,000
290,543
209,457
159,755
500,000
300,543
199,457
373,958
500,000
310,543
189,457
371,569
500,000
320,543
179,457
368,672
500,000
330,543
169,457
375,704
CASH FLOW AFTER FINANCING
209,457 49,702 (174,501) (182,112) (189,215) (206,247)
These numbers assume no inflation in revenue or expenses. It should be noted that any
surpluses in cash flow (as shown in years 1 and 2) will stay in the Sports Dome Fund and
will be available to manage its cash flow and any unexpected project needs (just like other
special revenue funds of the City). If we were to assume a 3 percent inflation factor for both
revenue and expenses (approximately a $5 /year increase in hourly rental fees), the annual
levy that will be need in years 1 -6 is as follows:
CASH FLOW - WITH INFLATION
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Revenue
Expenses
NET OPERATING INCOME
Debt Service (Interest Only In 2014)
500,000
290,543
209,457
0
514,925
298,359
216,566
159,755
530,298
316,410
213,888
373,958
546,132
334,702
211,429
371,569
562,441
353,243
209,197
368,672
579,314
372,041
207,273
375,704
CASH FLOW AFTER FINANCING
209,457 56,811 (160,070) (160,139) (159,475) (168,431)
Conclusion
As noted in the charts above, an annual tax levy will be required to pay for costs associated
with the Sports Dome, since current estimates of project revenues are not adequate. It
should be noted that to the extent revenues are greater than those shown, the annual levy
requirement will decrease accordingly.
We expect that the City will receive benefit from the new Sports Dome. However, the City
needs to weigh the benefits and determine if an annual operating subsidy of $170,000 to
$200,000 is reasonable and affordable.
If the City Council choses to proceed with the project, we anticipate that we would begin the
process to issue the bonds at one of your meetings in June. Please contact us at 651 -697-
8500 with any questions.
!2J CITY OF
Or' MENDDTA HEIGHTS
page 11
1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights, Mn
651.452.1850 phone 651.452.8940 fa.
www.rnendota•heights.com
DATE: June 18, 2013
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Justin Miller, City Administrator
SUBJECT: Ordinance 454 Amending City Code Regarding Garages
BACKGROUND
3.
The city council discussed a potential zoning ordinance amendment that would impact accessory
structures and private garages at their regular meeting June 4, 2013. As described at the meeting, the
proposed code amendment would allow residential properties to have two garages. The code would also
allow a garage to have up to 36 lineal feet of garage door, an increase from current code, which allows up
to three doors, with no distinction on lineal feet of those doors.
The code also proposes an update on the way the maximum area for a detached garage is determined and
reduce the total number of accessory structures allowed.
The planning commission discussed the proposed ordinance at their regular meeting in April, 2013, and
again in conjunction with a public hearing on the matter at their regular meeting in May, 2013. The
planning commission has recommended approval of the draft ordinance There were no comments at the
public hearing.
Two changes have been made to the draft ordinance since the June 4, 2013 city council meeting.
Language was added that finishing materials on accessory structures must be identical to principle
structures, as directed by city council. Staff also added a new Section One to the ordinance, which would
add language clarifying that all accessory structures greater than 144 square feet would require a
conditional use permit. The code permits detached garages up to 650 square feet.
Attached are copies of past reports on this matter, a comparison of current code to the proposed ordinance
and four examples showing the rear yard area of four different Mendota Heights properties. The
examples illustrate how proposed standards would apply under the draft ordninance
BUDGET IMPACT
N/A
RECOMMENDATION
The planning commission voted 6:0 (Noonan absent) to recommend approval of the code amendment as
described in planning case 2013 -07. Staff recommends that city council discuss Ordinance 454 as
drafted, and provide feedback.
page 12
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 454
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 12, CHAPTER 1 OF THE CITY CODE
PERTAINING TO GARAGES
The City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota ordains as follows:
SECTION 1:
The following language in Section 12 -1D -3B is hereby amended to add the following language:
B. Accessory Structures In All Zoning Districts: accessory structures up to 144 square feet are
permitted. Accessory structures greater than 144 square feet, up to 1000 square feet, are
allowed by conditional use permit.
SECTION 2:
The following language in Section 12 -1D -3C is hereby amended to read:
C. Accessory Structures In All Residential Districts: accessory structures and private garages
shall be architecturally compatible with the principal structure. The finishing materials used
on accessory structures, including but not limited to, siding and shingles, shall be identical to
the finishing materials used on the principal structure.
1. Private garages in all residential districts:
a. Number: Only one private garage, either attached or detached, is allowed for each
principal residential structure, except by conditional use permit.
b. Size:
(1) Attached private garage:
(A) Up to one thousand two hundred (1,200) square feet is permitted.
(B) One thousand two hundred (1,200) to one thousand five hundred
(1,500) square feet is allowed via a conditional use permit.
(2) Detached private garage:
(A) Up to four hundred forty ('I'10) six hundred fifty (650) square feet is
permitted.
page 13
(B) Four hundred forty ('1110) to seven hundred fifty (750) square feet iJ
allowed via a conditional use. More than 650 square feet, up to a total
floor area no greater than the foundation footprint of the principal
residential building; nor more than ten percent (10 %) of the rear yard,
whichever is less via a conditional use permit. A detached private garage
may not exceed 1,500 square feet of area.
PRIVATE GARAGE SIZE STANDARDS
IN ALL RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS
Attached Detached
(Square Feet) (Square Feet)
Permitted 1,200 maximum 110 maximum
Tcoitio1 use 1,200 to 1,500 /110 t 750
lOver 1,504 Over 750
Prohibited
c. Standards For Private Garages In All Residential Districts:
(1) Floor Of A Garage: In all R districts, the floor of a garage shall be at least one
and one -half feet (11 /2') above the street grade at the curb unless a deviation is
granted by the public works director upon determination that a lower elevation is
appropriate.
(2) Garage Doors: No more than thirty six (36) lineal feet of garage door per
structure, measured horizontally, may be installed to provide access to any private
garage or other accessory building space on a single or two - family residential
property a double wide and a single wide garage door, or three (3) single wide
garage doors shall be permitted. More than thirty six (36) lineal feet of garage
door may be provided by Conditional Use Permit when such additional garage
door exposure is not visible from a public street or from surrounding residential
property.
(3) Height: No garage doors over nine feet (9') in height shall be permitted.
(4) Use: No use of the garage shall be permitted other than private residential
noncommercial use.
2. Accessory structures (other than detached, private garages) in all residential districts:
a. Number And Size - No detached accessory building shall exceed the following size
allowances:
page 14
(1) Accessory buildings (other than detached, private garages) shall not exceed
one thousand (1,000) square feet.
(1) Property is four (4) acres or less *: One accessory structure with the area not to
exceed one hundred forty four (144) square feet is permitted.
(2) Property is more than four (4) acres *: Up to two accessory structures, with a
total area not to exceed 440 square feet are permitted. Total area cannot exceed
four hundred twenty five ('125) square feet, provided:
(A) No more than three (3) accessory structures may be erected.
In computing the area of the property on which an accessory structure is to be
located, any part which is a lake or a wetland, as defined in any city ordinance or
by state or federal law, any part which is subject to an easement for a street, alley
or private roadway, and any part which is in the critical area and below the "bluff
line ", as defined in chapter 3, "Critical Area Overlay District ", of this title shall be
excluded.
(3) A detached accessory building which is not a private garage may be
constructed larger than the allowances in this section by Conditional Use Permit,
provided that in no case shall such building be larger than one thousand (1,000)
square feet of total floor area.
b. Through Lots: All accessory buildings greater than one hundred forty four (144) square
feet on through lots located in R districts shall require a conditional use permit.
Adopted and ordained into an Ordinance this eighteenth day of June, 2013.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Sandra Krebsbach, Mayor
ATTEST
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
page 15
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 454
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 12, CHAPTER 1 OF THE CITY CODE
PERTAINING TO GARAGES
The City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota ordains as follows:
SECTION 1:
The following language in Section 12 -1D -3B is hereby amended to add the following language:
B. Accessory Structures In All Zoning Districts: accessory structures up to 144 square feet are
permitted. Accessory structures greater than 144 square feet, up to 1000 square feet, are
allowed by conditional use permit.
SECTION 2:
The following language in Section 12 -1D -3C is hereby amended to read:
C. Accessory Structures In All Residential Districts: accessory structures and private garages
shall be architecturally compatible with the principal structure. The finishing materials used
on accessory structures, including but not limited to, siding and shingles, shall be identical to
the finishing materials used on the principal structure.
1. Private garages in all residential districts:
a. Number: Only one private garage, either attached or detached, is allowed for each
principal residential structure, except by conditional use permit.
b. Size:
(1) Attached private garage:
(A) Up to one thousand two hundred (1,200) square feet is permitted.
(B) One thousand two hundred (1,200) to one thousand five hundred
(1,500) square feet is allowed via a conditional use permit.
(2) Detached private garage:
(A) Up to six hundred fifty (650) square feet is permitted.
page 16
(B) More than 650 square feet, up to a total floor area no greater than the
foundation footprint of the principal residential building; nor more than
ten percent (10 %) of the rear yard, whichever is less via a conditional use
permit. A detached private garage may not exceed 1,500 square feet of
area.
c. Standards For Private Garages In All Residential Districts:
(1) Floor Of A Garage: In all R districts, the floor of a garage shall be at least one
and one -half feet (11 /2') above the street grade at the curb unless a deviation is
granted by the public works director upon determination that a lower elevation is
appropriate.
(2) Garage Doors: No more than thirty six (36) lineal feet of garage door per
structure, measured horizontally, may be installed to provide access to any private
garage or other accessory building space on a single or two - family residential
property. More than thirty six (36) lineal feet of garage door may be provided by
Conditional Use Permit when such additional garage door exposure is not visible
from a public street or from surrounding residential property.
(3) Height: No garage doors over nine feet (9') in height shall be permitted.
(4) Use: No use of the garage shall be permitted other than private residential
noncommercial use.
2. Accessory structures (other than detached, private garages) in all residential districts:
a. Number And Size - No detached accessory building shall exceed the following size
allowances:
(1) Property is four (4) acres or less *: One accessory structure with the area not to
exceed one hundred forty four (144) square feet is permitted.
(2) Property is more than four (4) acres *: Up to two accessory structures, with a
total area not to exceed 440 square feet are permitted.
*In computing the area of the property on which an accessory structure is to be
located, any part which is a lake or a wetland, as defined in any city ordinance or
by state or federal law, any part which is subject to an easement for a street, alley
or private roadway, and any part which is in the critical area and below the "bluff
line ", as defined in chapter 3, "Critical Area Overlay District ", of this title shall be
excluded.
(3) A detached accessory building which is not a private garage may be
constructed larger than the allowances in this section by Conditional Use Permit,
page 17
provided that in no case shall such building be larger than one thousand (1,000)
square feet of total floor area.
b. Through Lots: All accessory buildings greater than one hundred forty four (144) square
feet on through lots located in R districts shall require a conditional use permit.
Adopted and ordained into an Ordinance this eighteenth day of June, 2013.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Sandra Krebsbach, Mayor
ATTEST
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
page 18
Comparison of Current City Code and Ordinance 454 pertaining to Accessory Structures and
Private Garages
Current Code
Ordinance 454
Total # of acc. structures — property four acres or less
1 total
1 total
Total # of acc. structures — property greater than four acres
3 total
2 total
Size limit for acc. structures — permitted
144 Sq. Feet
144 Sq. Feet
Size limit for acc. structures — CUP
1000 Sq. Feet
1000 Sq. Feet
Total # of garages:
1 total
2 total
Size limit for attached garage — permitted
1200 Sq. Feet
1200 Sq. Feet
Size limit for attached garage — CUP
1500 Sq. Feet
1500 Sq. Feet
Size limit for detached garage — permitted
440 Sq. Feet
650 Sq. Feet
Size limit for detached garage — CUP
750 Sq. Feet
Lesser of:
• 1500 Sq. Feet
• 10% of rear yard area
• Footprint of principle
Structure
Garage doors
3 total
36 lineal feet total
page 19
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC.
4800 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 202, Golden Valley, MN 55422
Telephone: 763.231 .2555 Facsimile: 763.231 .2581 planners@nacplanning.com
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mendota Heights Planning Commission
FROM: Stephen W. Grittman
DATE: May 23, 2013
MEETING DATE: May 28, 2013
SUBJECT: Zoning Ordinance Amendment — Garage Size Regulations
CASE NO: Case No. 2013 -07; NAC Case 254.04 -
APPLICANT(S): City of Mendota Heights
LOCATION: NA
ZONING: NA
GUIDE PLAN: NA
Background and Description of Request:
Over the past few months, the Commission has been reviewing and discussing options
for amending the zoning ordinance regulations related to garage size. Attached to this
memorandum is the most recent draft of language that addresses these changes. The
basics of the proposed amendment are as follows:
• Specify that accessory structures must be architecturally compatible with the
principal building.
• Allow, by Conditional Use Permit, more than one garage structure on a
residential property. Thus, a single family home could, by CUP, construct up to
1,500 square feet of attached garage space, and also a detached garage that
meets the standards for such buildings.
page 20
• Change detached garage requirements to permit up to 650 square feet of floor
area as a permitted use, rather than the previously required Conditional Use
Permit.
• Allow, by Conditional Use Permit, detached garages from 650 square feet up to
1,500 square feet, but no more than either of the following two limitations:
o 10% of the rear yard area; or
o Equal to the foundation footprint area of the principal home (this standard
raised some concerns at the previous Commission meeting).
• Change the current regulations relating to garage doors from the number of
doors to an allowance of up to 36 lineal feet of garage door per structure.
• Allow, by Conditional Use Permit, more than 36 lineal feet of garage door when
the doors are not visible to street or neighbors.
• Change the "Accessory Building" reference standards to clarify the number of
small accessory buildings.
• Specify that non - garage accessory buildings may be constructed larger than the
size of sheds by Conditional Use Permit.
With these changes, residential parcels would be able to increase the amount of garage
area on their property, but in almost all cases, the CUP provisions would allow the City
to manage this construction to fit the circumstances of the neighboring area. As noted,
certain of these draft provisions raised some concern from various members of the
Commission, and are included here to ensure a full discussion of the ideas that have
been brought forward.
Action Requested:
Following a public hearing, the Planning Commission may recommend one of the
following actions:
1. Approval of the amendment to the zoning ordinance as presented, or as
amended by the Commission, incorporating a finding that the regulations would
continue to protect the residential character of the City's neighborhoods, and
provide better opportunities to enclose automobiles and other personal property
to avoid outdoor storage.
2. Denial of the amendment to the zoning ordinance, based on a finding that the
current regulations do the best job of implementing the Commission intent related
to the Comprehensive Plan and maintain the distinctions between reasonable
and unreasonable uses of residential property.
3. Table action on the amendment, pending additional information from staff or
others.
page 21
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends the amendment as reflective of the changing needs of single family
residential land uses, and the value in protective neighborhoods from the impacts of
outdoor storage of equipment, vehicles, and personal property. The proposed
regulations are intended to provide flexibility to property owners in meeting their storage
and parking needs, with the balance of ensuring that residential garages do not
overwhelm the properties, or the neighboring properties, in which they are located.
Supplementary Materials:
1. Draft ORDINANCE NO. 454, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 12 CHAPTER
1 OF THE CITY CODE PERTAINING TO GARAGES.
page 22
Dakota County, MN
allowed under current co • - =
allowed under proposed code = 65d'
Disclaimer: Map and parcel data are believed to be accurate, but accuracy is not guaranteed. This is not a
legal document and should not be substituted for a title search,appraisal, survey, or for zoning verification.
Dakota County assumes no legal responsibility for the information contained in this data.
Map Scale
1 inch = 32 feet
3/19/2013
page 23
Dakota County, MN
Disclaimer: Map and parcel data are believed to be accurate, but accuracy is not guaranteed. This is not a
legal document and should not be substituted for a title search,appraisal, survey, or for zoning verification.
Dakota County assumes no legal responsibility for the information contained in this data.
Map Scale
1 inch = 78 feet
3/19/2013
page 24
Dakota County, MN
0.17 Acres •
allowed under current code = 750'
allowed under proposed code = 741'
71.6'
Disclaimer: Map and parcel data are believed to be accurate, but accuracy is not guaranteed. This is not a
legal document and should not be substituted for a title search,appraisal, survey, or for zoning verification.
Dakota County assumes no legal responsibility for the information contained in this data.
Map Scale
1 inch = 32 feet
3/19/2013
page 25
Dakota County, MN
Rear Yard =
allowed under current code = 750'
allowed under proposed code = 653'
Disclaimer: Map and parcel data are believed to be accurate, but accuracy is not guaranteed. This is not a
legal document and should not be substituted for a title search,appraisal, survey, or for zoning verification.
Dakota County assumes no legal responsibility for the information contained in this data.
Map Scale
1 inch = 32 feet
3/19/2013