Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017/10/18 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - Planning Commission - RegularAGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNITY ROOM 6:00 P.M. OCTOBER 18, 2017 1. Call to order – Roll Call 2. Approval of Minutes October 4, 2017 3. Hearings A. Water Treatment Plant 4 – Amendment to Conditional Use Permit with Variance Location: 4701 West 41st Street Applicant: City of St. Louis Park Case No.: 17-26-CUP, 17-27-VAR B. Zoning Ordinance Amendment – Industrial Uses Third Shift Applicant: Lyman Lumber Case No: 17-25-ZA 4. Other Business 5. Communications 6. Adjournment If you cannot attend the meeting, please call the Community Development Office, 952/924-2575. Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. To make arrangements, please call 952.928.2840 at least 96 hours in advance of meeting. UNOFFICIAL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AND STUDY SESSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA OCTOBER 4, 2017 – 6:00 p.m. COMMUNITY ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison, Torrey Kanne, Lisa Peilen, Richard Person, Carl Robertson, Joe Tatalovich, MEMBERS ABSENT: Ethan Rickert (youth member) STAFF PRESENT: Sean Walther, Jacquelyn Kramer, Jennifer Monson 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of Minutes A. July 19, 2017 Commissioner Carper moved approval of the July 19, 2017 minutes. Commissioner Johnston-Madison seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 5-0-2 (Tatalovich and Kanne abstained). B. August 16, 2017 Commissioner Johnston-Madison moved approval of the August 16, 2017 minutes. Commissioner Carper seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 5-0-2 (Person and Robertson abstained). C. September 6, 2017 Commissioner Robertson moved approval of the September 6, 2017 minutes. Commissioner Johnston-Madison seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 5-0-2 (Tatalovich and Person abstained). 3. Public Hearings A. Platia Place – Preliminary Plat; Preliminary PUD Location: 9808 and 9920 Wayzata Boulevard Applicant: SLP Venture Properties Case No.: 17-19-S and 17-20-PUD Jacquelyn Kramer, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. She stated the application was previously presented on June 21, 2017, at which time the Unofficial Minutes Planning Commission October 4, 2017 Page 2 Commission moved to table the application pending additional information needed from the applicant. Ms. Kramer explained that previously the application was short on parking but now both lots meet the city’s minimum parking requirements. Ms. Kramer reviewed building materials. For approval of the Final PUD staff suggests requiring submittal of material samples for review. Ms. Kramer noted that at the June 21st presentation the application had planting shortfalls. These have improved significantly since last time but there are still some shortfalls on the apartment site. She said there is a shortfall of 65 trees and 303 shrubs. There are also alternative landscaping features including 396 perennial plantings on the south side of the residential lot. She said that alternative landscaping requirements are features that are not necessarily plantings but also contribute to the design of the site. Other features that could be used here include green roofs, roof top gardens and public art. Ms. Kramer said staff found a shortfall in DORA on the hotel site. Staff suggests a revised DORA plan showing at least 12% DORA on the hotel lot as a condition of approval. Ms. Kramer reviewed zoning compliance factors. Ms. Kramer reviewed all conditions to be met before approval of the Final Plat and Final PUD by the City Council. Chair Peilen said at the first presentation there was a shortfall of landscaping materials. She asked now that it has come up again is there something about the lot that makes it more difficult to meet requirements. Ms. Kramer said the green spaces available on site are fully landscaped and the building footprint takes up a large part of the site. Commissioner Johnston-Madison said she isn’t pleased with the privacy screening wall between adjacent buildings being considered as an articulation element. She said she hasn’t seen this in any other projects. Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor, said he wasn’t aware of any time that particular method has been used. He explained that the requirement is related to building elevations that are visible from off-site. There is limited public visibility to this particular elevation because of trees along that side as well Unofficial Minutes Planning Commission October 4, 2017 Page 3 as the adjacent parking ramp. For that reason staff was willing to put that forward to the Commission for comment. Commissioner Johnston-Madison said we’re still looking at the same engineering comments that need to be met. She asked if that is normal to still be looking at the same items. She said she’s also concerned about the look of the building even though it’s a view not necessarily seen by the public. Commissioner Carper asked if the buildings will include electric car charging ports. Ms. Kramer said she wasn’t aware of any charge stations on the site. Commissioner Kanne asked if is there a reason why exterior materials need some discussion and why they need further review or approval by staff. Ms. Kramer stated that the applicant has provided an extensive table showing breakdown of materials on each façade with a label. The request for samples is just to confirm, for example, the stucco and other elements are correct. She said the city has received samples for other projects and this is something we’ve done in the past. Bill Stoddard, applicant, said regarding exterior façade, they tried to differentiate in a number of ways including green planting on facades, green roof tray planting systems, masonry to the pool deck, addition of stucco and removal of some siding. He said electric charge stations are a good idea. Mr. Stoddard said they’ve put a lot of plantings on the site and they request some consideration for plantings at the apartment site. The north side façade faces a parking ramp. He stated they are building an expensive building with a lot of good materials. If they differentiate more that affects the size of the building and unit counts. He said they’d like some consideration on the plantings and DORA for the hotel. Commissioner Robertson had questions about accessible parking spaces on the opposite side of drive aisles. Mr. Stoddard said they would look at changing those. Commissioner Carper recommended putting in channels for electric charging stations to accommodate future need. Commissioner Robertson said it’s a nice project and looks very good. Unofficial Minutes Planning Commission October 4, 2017 Page 4 Chair Peilen re-opened the public hearing. Jerry Kern, 1155 Ford Road, #316, said he also spoke at the June 21, 2017 meeting. His building is right next to the development. He spoke about his support for the development. The vacant lot looks terrible and has become a dumping site. He said the developer is willing to put two beautiful buildings and landscaping on the property. He asked the Commission for their approval. He said he is tired of the delay and hopes the Commission will work with the developer to move forward. He commented that the remaining concerns are very small and he has confidence the developer will meet those concerns. As no one else was present wishing to speak, the Chair closed the public hearing. Commissioner Kanne said she likes the project and it makes a lot of sense. She said the details in these projects are important and we need to make sure we get those details right. She said there needs to be more discussion on the planting situation. She stated that St. Louis Park has always had a standard of mature trees, lots of shrubs, and a beautiful environment for a first ring suburb and we need to stay on that path. Chair Peilen said the project looks good but she wishes the list of things that need to be done wasn’t quite so long. She said she would support the project provided the conditions are met. Commissioner Johnston-Madison said she knows the property has long been in need of development and she is glad someone has come forward to do that. She said she appreciates that it is a difficult lot. She added that she has never been totally comfortable with the application and she will have to abstain from voting. Commissioner Person and Mr. Walther spoke about the city’s green building policy. Mr. Walther discussed the climate action plan of the city. Commissioner Robertson made a motion recommending approval of the Preliminary Plat and Preliminary PUD with conditions as recommended by staff. Commissioner Tatalovich seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 6-0-1 (Johnston-Madison abstained). 4. Other Business 5. Communications 6. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 6:40 p.m. Unofficial Minutes Planning Commission October 4, 2017 Page 5 PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA OCTOBER 4, 2017 6:00 P.M. 1. Mixed-Use Zoning District Concept Review – Façade Details and Screening Jennifer Monson, Planner, asked the Commission for their feedback on façade details and screening options for new mixed-use buildings within proposed amendments to the mixed-use zoning ordinance. Commissioners commented that all the new mixed-use buildings are looking the same. Commissioner Kanne asked if there has ever been a conversation about what makes a classic look. Commissioner Robertson commented that he understands the desire to have good looking buildings. He said sometimes being too prescriptive makes things start to look the same. He commented that transparency for ground floor commercial does give pedestrians a sense of safety. He doesn’t know if it’s necessary to zone for it. Ms. Monson spoke about the ability in the PUD process to negotiate on the amount of fenestration on the ground floor and making sure that fenestration is transparent. Ms. Monson spoke about the responsibility of planners and the Commission to make sure the public realm is what it should be. Commissioner Robertson said basically it goes back to form-based zoning. How does the building relate to the street? Not just the height but the building envelope. Commissioner Carper discussed commonly designed flat street level entrys differentiated by color. He discussed the use of in-set doorways which are seen in older buildings. He noted that design does take away from square footage, however. Chair Peilen spoke about balance. She said a development needs guidelines but they shouldn’t be too prescriptive as ideas of beauty change. Buildings should have character. Commissioner Robertson stated we don’t need zoning to do good design. A client wants unique, good design. Chair Peilen spoke about building materials and commented that building materials over the years change what we get. Unofficial Minutes Planning Commission October 4, 2017 Page 6 Ms. Monson said the city’s current architectural standards are pretty basic and pretty easy to apply. They require 60% of the building to be Class I materials. They don’t specify transparency of ground floor currently but she suggested a certain percentage should be included as a minimum. Commissioner Robertson said maybe at corners or around the entry we want a bit of transparency. He said he doesn’t know of any architect who thinks the 60% requirement is restrictive. There are so many materials which can be used. He suggested not specifying what architects have to do; but making it clear what they can’t do. Ms. Monson commented that we are trying to make the best projects for the city and the long term. Jacquelyn Kramer, Associate Planner, discussed façade planes, which allows flexibility through ratios and divisions that are offset from the rest of the facade. That can provide consideration of the overall area, breaks up building mass, creates visual interest and improves interaction with the street. We want our focus to always consider the pedestrian and public realm. Ms. Kramer discussed higher standards for prominent building corners. Commissioner Robertson asked if that is done through setbacks. Ms. Kramer spoke about corner features, pedestrian plazas, special roof forms and more visibility at prominent building corners. Commissioners said they were interested in seeing corner standards included in an M-X amendment. Ms. Monson discussed side and rear screening so that landscaping and screening can benefit adjacent residential buildings as well as the mixed use buildings, sometimes creating a special neighborhood space. She also spoke about the Guidelines for the South Side of Excelsior Blvd. which included creating a 10 ft. wide zone that includes a fence and landscaping buffer to separate the more intense uses in M-X or commercial from the residential buildings. Commissioner Kanne said she liked the idea of special areas as discussed, adding that it seemed very area-specific. Ms. Monson suggested the next study session could include more on building design, as well as site design, circulation access and loading docks. Unofficial Minutes Planning Commission October 4, 2017 Page 7 Commissioner Robertson commented that loading dock areas are changing by becoming smaller and more efficient. The study session was adjourned at 7:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Nancy Sells Recording Secretary Planning Commission Meeting Date: October 18, 2017 Agenda Item 3a 3a. Water Treatment Plant 4 - Amendment to Conditional Use Permit with Variance Case No.: 17-26-CUP, 17-27-VAR Location: 4701 West 41st Street Applicant: Owner: St. Louis Park Engineering Department City of St. Louis Park Recommended Action: Chair to close public hearing. Motion to recommend approval of the Amendment to Conditional Use Permit and Variance for 4701 West 41st Street subject to conditions recommended by staff. Review Deadline: 60 Days: 11/24/2017 120 Days: 01/23/2018 REQUEST: St. Louis Park Engineering Department requests an amendment to a conditional use permit and variance application to make exterior improvements to a stormwater treatment facility on the parcel located at 4701 West 41st Street. The request is to make improvements to Water Treatment Plant 4, including the installation of a remote radiator and screening wall on the east side of the building, in order to re-open the facility and improve water treatment capacity. A conditional use permit is required for a public services facility in an R-1 district. A variance is requested to reduce the front setback from 30 feet to 15 feet to allow construction of mechanical equipment and a screening wall on the east side of the building. SITE INFORMATION: Comprehensive Plan: RL Low Density Residential Zoning District: R-1 Single Family Residential Neighborhood: Minikhada Vista Neighborhood Surrounding Uses: South & West: Susan Lindgren Elementary School North & East: Single family residences Edina’s city border lies east of the site at the property line. ZONING ANALYSIS: Existing Conditions: The city-owned well house at 4701 West 41st Street has been off-line pending improvements since December 2016. Agenda Item No. 3a. Water Treatment Plant 4 – Amendment to Conditional Use Permit & Variance Page 2 Meeting Date: October 18, 2017 Background: The city sought and received city council approval for a special permit to construct a municipal well house and water treatment facility in 1991. A variance was previously approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals (BOZA) to decrease setbacks on the west and east side of the parcel. In March 2016 the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) notified the city that it was issuing a “Notice of Health Risk Advisory” for Treatment Plant #4 effluent. The advisory was based on exceedance of a health risk limit in the water at the well house. At its December 19, 2016, meeting, the St. Louis Park City Council approved staff's recommendation that Water Treatment Plant #4 be taken out of service as of January 1, 2017. After obtaining all necessary approvals from involved agencies, Water Treatment Plant #4 was taken out of service Wednesday, December 28, 2016. It will remain out of service until upgrades to the plant are completed. On September 20, 2017, City Council moved to adopt a resolution approving final plans and specifications of exterior and interior improvements to Water Treatment Plant 4, and authorizing advertisement for bids. Conditional Use Permit Analysis: Water Treatment 4 falls under the “Public Services Structures” land use category, which is a use permitted by conditional use permit in the R-1 district. Conditional Use Permit - General Standards and Conditions: City code includes the following general standards and conditions for the city to consider while reviewing a CUP application: 1. Consistency with plans. It is consistent with and supportive of principles, goals, objectives, land use designations, redevelopment plans, neighborhood objectives, and implementation strategies of the comprehensive plan. The proposal is consistent with all relevant city plans. 2. Nuisance. It is not detrimental to the health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community as a whole. It will not have undue adverse impacts on the use and enjoyment of properties, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, parking facilities on adjacent streets, and values of properties in close proximity to the conditional use. The proposal is not detrimental to the health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. There are no undue adverse impacts on properties in close proximity to the site. 3. Compliance with code. The proposal is compliant with all relevant city code. 4. Consistency with service capacity. It will not have undue adverse impacts on governmental facilities, services or improvements which are either existing or proposed. The proposal will have no undue adverse impacts on governmental facilities or services, and will in fact improve water treatment services in the city. 5. Site design. The proposal is consistent with design and landscape plan requirements, and the plans will be adopted as part of the conditions imposed on the use by the city council. The landscape plan will follow all planting and landscaping requirements. Agenda Item No. 3a. Water Treatment Plant 4 – Amendment to Conditional Use Permit & Variance Page 3 Meeting Date: October 18, 2017 6. Consistency with utilities. The proposal is consistent with the City’s stormwater, sanitary sewer, and water plans. 7. Conditions specific to site. The proposal complies with all conditions imposed by the City Council and listed within the conditional use permit. R-1 Single Family Residence District – General Conditions: In addition to the conditions specific to the CUP, the R-1 district also has general considerations that need to be addressed during the review of the application. They are as follows: 1. All exterior faces of all buildings shall meet the provisions of section 36-366. Condition met. The screening wall will be constructed of all Class-1 materials. 2. All structures shall be located a minimum of 15 feet from any parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including by not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers. Condition met. 3. All service drives shall be paved. Condition met. Variance Analysis: A variance is needed for the remote radiator enclosure along the east outside wall of the existing building. The front yard of the site is the space between the existing building and 41st Street. However, as zoned, the front yard of the property is the space east of the building, along Natchez Avenue. Because of the unique characteristics of the site, the east yard is the optimal location for the radiator and screening wall: • The green space between the building and 41st street is above an existing buried water reclaim tank that was not designed to support the weight of the proposed radiator equipment. • The slope south of the building precludes placing the remote radiator on this side of the building. • The remote radiator must be placed a maximum distance away from equipment inside the building. The area west of the building is too far away given these limitations. The criteria for granting variances and the applicant and staff’s finding for each are provided below. 1. The effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community. The proposal will improve the overall health, safety and welfare of the community by allowing Water Treatment Plant 4 to operate at optimal conditions. 2. The request is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning ordinance. The proposal places an accessory structure in what is functionally a side yard. The variance Agenda Item No. 3a. Water Treatment Plant 4 – Amendment to Conditional Use Permit & Variance Page 4 Meeting Date: October 18, 2017 will decrease the setback of this yard to allow the structure to conform to the zoning ordinance. 3. The request is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The proposed variance request is consistent with the comprehensive plan because it enhances the ability of SLP Utilities to fulfill its mission of providing an uninterrupted supply of safe, high quality water to its customers. 4. The applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. “Practical difficulties,” as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that: a. The property owner proposes to use the property for a land use permitted in the zoning district in which the land is located. A variance can be requested for dimensional items required in the zoning ordinance, including but not limited to setbacks and height limitations. The proposed use of a remote radiator for an emergency generator is permitted in the zoning district. b. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. The variance is needed due to circumstances unique to the Water Treatment Plant 4 property. c. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The screening wall location minimizes the visual impact of the facility from adjacent parcels. The material of the screening wall will match the materials used in the existing building, and thus will not alter the essential character of the locality. d. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. The choice of radiator and location of the facility were made to maximize efficiency and service to residents while minimizing the impact to adjacent parcels. The practical difficulties of the site do not include economic considerations. 5. There are circumstances unique to the property include the shape, topography, water conditions, or other physical conditions unique to the property. The unique orientation of the property created a need for the variance. The technical front yard is the east frontage along Natchez Avenue, while the functional front yard is the north frontage along West 41st Street. 6. The granting of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The variance is necessary for the optimal operation of Water Treatment Plant 4. 7. The granting of the variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to the adjacent property, unreasonably increase the congestion in the public streets, increase the danger of fire, or endanger public safety. The variance will create no undue adverse impacts on nearby properties. Agenda Item No. 3a. Water Treatment Plant 4 – Amendment to Conditional Use Permit & Variance Page 5 Meeting Date: October 18, 2017 8. The granting of the variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant but is necessary to alleviate a practical difficulty. Condition met. Landscaping & Tree Inventory: The installation of the radiator and screening wall on the east side of the building necessitates removing one existing tree; however the city Natural Resources Coordinator has determined this tree is dying. The zoning ordinance requires eight canopy trees on the site. There are currently 35 canopy trees on site; therefore no new trees are required. The zoning ordinance requires 48 shrubs on site. At the time of this report shrub counts on the site were incomplete; however city staff have identified areas where more plantings can be added to meet landscaping requirements. Staff recommends requiring a submittal of a landscape plan for review before building permits are issued for the project. Neighborhood Meeting: A neighborhood meeting was held on October 19, 2017 in the Community Room at City Hall. Five residents attended. Overall, residents expressed support of the project and the improvements to the water treatment plant. Several residents asked questions about current and future landscaping on the parcel, and expressed interest in the city improving landscaping on the property. Residents also asked about the level of noise that would be generated by the radiator, and the effect construction would have on parking in the area. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the Amendment to the Conditional Use Permit and Variance for decreasing the front setback to from 30 feet to 15 feet with the following conditions: 1. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in conformance with the Official Exhibits. 2. Before building permits are issued, a complete landscape plan shall be submitted to planning staff for review and approval. 3. All required permits shall be obtained prior to starting construction, including but not limited to City of St. Louis Park Erosion Control and Building Permits. 4. Stormwater Management: a. The drainage system shall be owned and maintained by the City of St. Louis Park. b. A complete soils report shall be submitted prior to permitting for City Engineering Department review and approval. 5. Under the Zoning Ordinance, this permit shall be revoked and cancelled if the use for which the conditional use permit ceases. Attachments: 1. Site Plan 2. Grading Plan 3. Building Elevations 4. Planting Inventory Prepared by: Jacquelyn Kramer, Assistant Planner Reviewed by: Sean Walther, Planning & Zoning Supervisor NATCHEZ AVE.41st S T R E E T WELL 4 WATER TREATMENT FACILITY N = 1032033.707 E = 2795607.419 N = 1031951.130 E = 2795791.109 N = 1032114.822 E = 2795790.211 SERVWELL 4 WATER TREATMENT FACILITY Printed on ___% Post-Consumer Recycled Content Paper KEY PLAN CONSULTANT AECOM 800 LASALLE AVENUE MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402 612.376.2000 tel 612.376.2271 fax www.aecom.com PROJECT PROJECT NUMBER 60513153ANSI D 22" x 34"Last saved by: ARMITAGED(2017-09-29) Last Plotted: 2017-09-30Filename: P:\60489570\900_WORK\910-CAD\SLP4\20-SHEETS\C\60489570_SITE-PLAN-WTP-04_02-C-02.DWGREGISTRATIONREGISTRATIONREGISTRATION I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS PREPAREDBY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONAND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTEREDPROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWSOF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.DATE: ____________ REG. NO. _____________PAUL HERUBINSEPT. 201745243Project Management Initials:Designer:Checked:Approved: DMA AMG JFLLast saved by: ARMITAGED(2017-09-29) Last Plotted: 2017-09-30Project Management Initials:Designer:Checked:Approved:_______________Filename: P:\60489570\900_WORK\910-CAD\SLP4\20-SHEETS\C\60489570_SITE-PLAN-WTP-04_02-C-02.DWGI/R DATE DESCRIPTION ISSUE/REVISION SHEET TITLE UTILITY PLAN/GRADING PLAN DRAWING NUMBER SHEET NUMBER 02-C-02 00 10'20' 1" = 10' N SITE PLAN CATCH BASIN (ROUND) MANHOLE STORM GAS METER GUARD POST/BOLLARD SIGN POST MANHOLE SANITARY FIRE HYDRANT U.G. WATER VALVE ELECTICAL PEDESTAL GUY ANCHOR POWER POLE TELEPHONE PEDESTAL DECIDUOUS TREE CONIFEROUS TREE LEGEND LANDSCAPE 1' CONTOUR 5' CONTOUR U.G. STORM SEWER U.G. GAS LINE U.G. ELECTRIC LINE U.G. TELEPHONE LINE U.G. SANITARY SEWER ROAD CENTERLINE BUILDING PROPERTY LINE CONSTRUCTION GRADING AND SEEDING LIMITS CONTACT TANK VENT PLAN NOTES 4 CONSTRUCTION GRADING AND SEEDING LIMITS 1 3 2 NEW 6" WATER LINE.1 NEW 6" TAPPING GATE VALVE.2 EXISTING 10" WATER MAINS.3 4 PROVIDE 36" CLEAR SPACE AROUND PERIMETER OF REMOTE RADIATOR. 5 NEW SIDEWALK, SEE ST. LOUIS PARK SIDEWALK DETAIL PLATE NO. ST-9, SHOWN ABOVE. 5 ADJACENT TO BUILDING 02-002 TYPICAL GRADING 6 6 GRADING NEAR STRUCTURES, SEE DETAIL 02-002. 6 SIDEWALK DETAIL PLATE NO. ST-9 7 8 7 EXISTING NATURAL GAS SERVICE TO BE ABANDONED IN-PLACE BY OTHERS. 8 NEW NATURAL GAS SERVICE TO BE PROVIDED BY OTHERS. 11 OF 83 32 OF 83 !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( 99 88 77 66 5544 33 22 11 3535 3434 3333 3232 3131 3030 2929 2828 2727 26262525 2424 2323 2222 2121 20201919 181817171616 1515 1414 1313 1212 1111 1010 Map #NAME DIAMETER1Amur Maple 112Crabapple103Austrian Pi ne 134Austrian Pi ne 155Amur Maple 146Amur Maple 97Austrian Pi ne 158Austrian Pi ne 119Colorado Bl ue Spruce 1110Colorado Bl ue Spruce 1011Colorado Bl ue Spruce 812Colorado Bl ue Spruce 1313Colorado Bl ue Spruce 1314Boxelder715American El m 1516Boxelder817American El m 718American El m 919Green Ash 620Siberian Elm 2021Siberian Elm 722Siberian Elm 2123Boxelder1124Boxelder2225Boxelder1526Boxelder1427American El m 1828Boxelder1229Boxelder1630Boxelder831Boxelder832American El m 1333Mulberry834Austrian Pi ne 1035White Ce dar 5 !(American Elm !(Amur Maple !(Austrian Pine !(Boxelder !(Colorado Blue Spruce !(Crabapple !(Green Ash !(Mulberry !(Siberian Elm !(White Cedar !(Shrubs 0 20 4010Feet ´ Planning Commission Meeting Date: October 18, 2017 Agenda Item 3B. 3B. Zoning Ordinance Amendment – Industrial Uses Third Shift. Case No.: 17-25-ZA Recommended Action: Chair to close public hearing. Motion to recommend approval of the Zoning Ordinance Amendment pertaining to extended business hours for Industrial uses adjacent to residential properties as recommended by staff. REQUEST: Lyman Lumber (Applicant) operates a building supply distribution center at the Westside Center located at 5320 23rd Street. The Applicant would like to expand its operation by starting a 3rd shift. It is unable to do so, however, due to Section 36-242(10) of the zoning ordinance which prohibits industrial uses from operating between 6am and 10pm Monday through Saturday when the industrial property is located adjacent to a residential property. Lyman Lumber is located adjacent to a residential property, therefore, it cannot operate a third shift. The Applicant believes the third shift would not impact the residential property for reasons discussed below, and therefore, is requesting an amendment to the code to allow a third shift if it can comply with specific conditions listed in the proposed ordinance (attached). BACKGROUND: The full text of Section 36-242(10), along with the proposed amendment is attached. In summary it prohibits businesses located in the Industrial Park and General Industrial zoning districts from operating between the hours of 10 pm and 6am when the industrial property is located adjacent to a property zoning residential. There are exceptions to this provision, and they include: 1. Administrative or office functions. 2. Maintenance or clean-up work conducted entirely within the building. Additionally, the portions of an industrial property located at least 100 feet away from a residential property are exempt from this provision if the industrial property is separated from a residential property by a right-of-way that is at least 66 feet wide. History of Existing Regulation: Section 36-242(10) was amended into the code as part of the 1990 recodification. The recodification included several task forces, each assigned specific sections of code to review and generate recommendations for. One task force was assigned to the Edgewood Industrial Park area. This task force recommended 27 code amendments, one of which is the section of code which is the subject of this amendment. The Edgewood Industrial Park area is pictured below. It is bound by residential to the north and west. Prior to the 1990 amendment, there were numerous complaints from these residential properties regarding noise during the day, night and into the weekend. Section 36-242(10) was created to provide relief to the residential properties from the noise. The noise included impacts from machinery, truck shipments, and outside storage activities. Agenda Item No 3B– Zoning Ordinance Amendment – Industrial Uses Third Shift Page 2 Meeting Date: October 18, 2017 Lyman Lumber: While the existing ordinance was drafted in large part to address impacts resulting from industrial activity at the Edgewood Industrial Park, Lyman Lumber believes they can operate the third shift in a manner that will not create impacts to the residential properties in close proximity to them which is the intent of the existing ordinance. Agenda Item No 3B– Zoning Ordinance Amendment – Industrial Uses Third Shift Page 3 Meeting Date: October 18, 2017 To accomplish, the activity during the third shift will be entirely contained within the building. There will be no truck or any other type of vehicle activity outside the building. All doors and windows will remain closed to contain noise inside the building. Noise generated by the exterior HVAC equipment cannot be perceived from the residential property line. In addition to the steps taken to ensure the operation does not impact residential properties, the circumstances surrounding the Westside Center have some notable differences from the Edgewood Industrial Park that contribute to reducing potential impacts: 1. The industrial buildings at Edgewood Industrial Park are approximately 30 feet away from residential properties while the Westside Center building is approximately 300 feet away from the closest residential property. 2. The Westside Center property is not adjacent to single-family residential, while Edgewood Industrial Park is directly adjacent to 20 single-family homes. 3. The residential property adjacent to Westside Center is an apartment building with the apartments 145 vehicle parking lot located between the apartment building and the Westside Center building. The apartment building is located approximately 650 feet away from the Westside Center building. The aerial photo is the latest available. It does not show the outdoor storage area located to the west of the Lyman Lumber space. The proposed amendment does not allow activity in the outdoor storage area during the extended business hours (third shift). Agenda Item No 3B– Zoning Ordinance Amendment – Industrial Uses Third Shift Page 4 Meeting Date: October 18, 2017 Proposed Amendment: The proposed amendment includes several conditions designed to reduce and eliminate potential impacts the extended business hours may have on residential properties in close proximity to the business. The conditions are summarized below: 1. A Registration of Land Use is approved authorizing specified activities to occur during the extended business hours. The Registration of Land Use (RLU) application requires the business to detail the operations it intends to conduct during the evening hours. This allows the city the opportunity to review the proposed operations for potential impacts. It also limits the business to those activities listed in the RLU. It cannot add additional activities without applying for a new RLU. 2. All business activities to be conducted during the extended business hours shall be conducted entirely indoors. This provision prohibits activities relating to outdoor storage, shipping/receiving, and any other vehicle activity outside the building. For example, Lyman Lumber has an extensive outdoor storage area that results in activity during the day. This provision prohibits the outdoor storage area from being accessed during the extended business hours. 3. All windows, doors, docks, and similar openings shall remain closed during extended business hours. Keeping these openings closed during the extended business hours is important to containing the noise and lights within the building. 4. The portion of the building housing the activities occurring during the extended business hours shall be located at least 300 feet from properties zoned Residential and improved with a residential use. The buffer not only limits the number of properties city wide that can benefit from the amendment, but it also creates a buffer between the building and residential properties. There are three areas in the city that benefit from the amendment. They are discussed in more detail below. In reviewing the areas we see that the 300 foot buffers are improved with a mixture of landscaping, buildings, right-of-way, and open space. This buffer provides needed space to diminish any residual noise and light impacts resulting from the operation. 5. There shall be no outbound or incoming deliveries or vehicular traffic other than traffic generated by employees. Truck traffic is a significant contributor to noise and light impacts. This provision, together with the other conditions, reinforces that vehicle activity is prohibited during the extended business hours. 6. Vehicles and any type of motorized equipment shall not be started or allowed to idle outside the building during the extended business hours. This provision again reinforces the city’s concerns about truck traffic. Specifically, it addresses attempts to run vehicles in preparation of activities to be conducted during regular business hours. It also prohibits trucks from starting or lining up in anticipation of resumption of regular business hours activities. This provision applies for all situations, including during the winter months when businesses desire to start vehicles early so they can warm up. Agenda Item No 3B– Zoning Ordinance Amendment – Industrial Uses Third Shift Page 5 Meeting Date: October 18, 2017 7. Employee parking shall be located as far from the residential properties as possible. This provision is intended to address the noise generated from employees arriving and departing at various hours. 8. Between 10:00 p.m. on Saturday and 10:00 p.m. on Sunday the business is limited to administrative or office functions or maintenance or cleanup work conducted entirely within a structure. This provision maintains the intent of the ordinance to limit business activities during the day on Sunday. 9. Outdoor employee smoking or break areas shall not be located between the building and a residential property. This is intended to address potential noise impacts from employees on break. Citywide Application of Proposed Amendment: While the proposed amendment is submitted by Lyman Lumber to address their specific situation, the city needs to consider potential impacts the proposed amendment may have elsewhere in the city. Attached to this report are four maps that show three industrial areas in the city that may take advantage of the proposed amendment. Area 1. Highlighted is one industrial property that may benefit from the proposed ordinance. The existing building is a multi-tenant building housing several small office and industrial businesses. It however, falls within the required 300 foot buffer and therefore, does not qualify for the extended business hours. The only portion of the property outside the required 300 foot buffer is a sliver of land on the east side of the property (highlighted on the map). This land while outside the 300 foot buffer is unlikely to be built on due to required setbacks. Therefore, it is unlikely that businesses locating on this property will be able to operate extended business hours as currently proposed. Area 2. This is the Westside Center property which is discussed above. It also includes city owned land on the eastern edge of the Edgewood Industrial Park. This land is used by the city for making woodchips and soil available to residents. It is also used for various low impact outside storage of materials needed for general city maintenance operations. Area 3. This area includes two properties. One is the Diamond Hill Industrial building located between County Road 25 and the railroad tracks. More than half of the building is located within the 300 foot buffer and does not qualify for the extended business hours. The northwest portion of the building is outside the 300 foot buffer and qualifies for the extended business hours. It is located adjacent to County Road 25 and other properties zoned industrial. The industrial properties located to the west of the Diamond Hill Industrial building can operate 24 hours per day, seven days a week because they are not located adjacent to residential. The second property in Area 3 is the Minikahda storage property located to the north of Minikahda Oaks neighborhood. Most of the property falls within the 300 foot buffer and would not qualify for the extended business hours. There is, however, a small sliver of Agenda Item No 3B– Zoning Ordinance Amendment – Industrial Uses Third Shift Page 6 Meeting Date: October 18, 2017 land along the north property line that qualifies for the extended business hours. This area is currently improved with a row of mini-storage units. It backs up to a property zoned Business Park which is improved with a multi-tenant building occupied with a mixture of office and industrial uses. Staff believes the impacts of the proposed amendment are minimal city wide. There are three existing buildings and one city owned parcel that benefit from the change. Neighborhood Meeting: A neighborhood meeting was conducted for this proposed zoning amendment. The intent of the neighborhood meeting was to allow the neighbors of Lyman Lumber to visit the site and see the proposed operations. They were able to witness the noise and lights first hand. Seven people attended. Four people live in the single-family neighborhood to the south of Lyman Lumber. Three people live in the condominiums to the west of Lyman Lumber. Concerns were expressed about the number of times Lyman Lumber violated the regular business hours by starting operations before six am. The violations consist of activities in the outdoor storage area and shipping/receiving. These concerns are a violation to the existing ordinance, and can be addressed through enforcement by the city. The Branch Manager, however was unaware of the violations, and gave out his phone number so neighbors can call if it continues. He assured them that he will address it. Lyman Lumber is also working to schedule deliveries so trucks will arrive at specified times instead of idling on-site waiting for an opening. The tour of the site included walking around the building while the operation was running. This confirmed that the noise was not noticeable from outside the building as long as the doors remain closed. Lyman Lumber conducted a noise study earlier in the year. The study showed that noise generated by Lym an Lumber does not exceed the levels generated by Highway 100. Copies of the noise study were handed out and is attached. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the attached amendment to the Zoning Ordinance pertaining to extended business hours for industrial uses adjacent to residential properties. Attachments: Draft Zoning Amendment City Maps Noise Study Prepared by: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator Meg McMonigal, Principal Planner Agenda Item No 3B– Zoning Ordinance Amendment – Industrial Uses Third Shift Page 7 Meeting Date: October 18, 2017 Draft Ordinance Below is the draft ordinance. The underlined text is language proposed to be added to the ordinance. ARTICLE IV. ZONING DISTRICTS DIVISION 8. INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT REGULATIONS *** Sec. 36-242. Industrial restrictions and performance standards; general provisions. *** (10) Where industrial uses are located on sites which abut R districts, all activities including trucking are limited to normal hours of operation except for those specifically excluded. Normal hours of operation are defined as being between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday inclusive and includes all manufacturing, processing, loading, unloading, truck maneuvering and movement of equipment and other materials. It does not include administrative or office functions or maintenance or cleanup work conducted entirely within a structure. Properties in the I districts situated so that railroad tracks or street and highway rights-of-way which are greater than 66 feet in width are located between the property in the I district and the R district are exempt from this requirement, except for that part of the site within 100 feet of a property line abutting any residentially used property. Operations may be conducted between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. Monday through Sunday, as authorized below: a. Extended Business Hours. A business may operate a third shift, extend its business hours beyond 10:00 p.m. or start earlier than 6:00 a.m. with the following conditions: 1. A Registration of Land Use is approved authorizing specified activities to occur during the extended business hours. 2. All business activities to be conducted during the extended business hours shall be conducted entirely indoors. 3. All windows, doors, docks, and similar openings shall remain closed during extended business hours. 4. The portion of the building housing the activities occurring during the extended business hours shall be located at least 300 feet from properties zoned Residential and improved with a residential use. 5. There shall be no outbound or incoming deliveries or vehicular traffic other than traffic generated by employees. Agenda Item No 3B– Zoning Ordinance Amendment – Industrial Uses Third Shift Page 8 Meeting Date: October 18, 2017 6. Vehicles and any type of motorized equipment shall not be started or allowed to idle outside the building during the extended business hours. 7. Employee parking shall be located as far from the residential properties as possible. 8. Between 10:00 p.m. on Saturday and 10:00 p.m. on Sunday the business is limited to administrative or office functions or maintenance or cleanup work conducted entirely within a structure. 9. Outdoor employee smoking or break areas shall not be located between the building and a residential property. b. Temporary Permit. A temporary permit to operate between 10:00pm and 6:00 am may be issued under the following conditions: 1. The person conducting operations outside of normal business hours shall apply for a temporary permit for hours of operation between 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. The application for such permit shall specify the name and address of the applicant, the location of the temporary operation, the nature of the activity, the anticipated duration of such activity and the name and telephone number of the responsible person available on the premises while temporary operations are being conducted. 2. A temporary permit may be granted for a period not to exceed 15 days. A person receiving a temporary permit may apply for extensions, provided that the number of days in which temporary permits are granted shall not exceed 90 days in any calendar year. 3. A permit shall not be issued to any applicant which has had two violations of a temporary permit and/or this chapter within a period of one year preceding the date of application. 4. A permit issued pursuant to this section shall be revoked upon a violation of this chapter or the terms of the permit by the permit holder. 5. No permit shall be issued for the time from 10:00 p.m. Saturday to 6:00 a.m. Monday. 6. When a permit is issued for a period of time exceeding five days, notice shall be sent to owners of residential property abutting the property for which a permit is granted informing them of the terms of the permit. The holder of the temporary permit shall reimburse the city for the cost of such notice. 7. Employee parking during temporary operations shall be located on the site as far as possible from parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers. 8. The fee for a temporary permit shall be as established by the city council. 9. Outdoor activity of any type, including trucking, shall be prohibited. Agenda Item No 3B– Zoning Ordinance Amendment – Industrial Uses Third Shift Page 9 Meeting Date: October 18, 2017 10. A business shall apply for a temporary permit at least one business day before the after- hour activity is to commence. The city shall act upon the temporary permit within one business day of receiving the request. Full Parcel Boundary The Part of Industrial Parcels Eligible for 3rd Shift*´ Industrial Parcels to BecomeEligible for Third Shift Number of Affected Industrial Parcels :5 0 1,200 2,400 3,600 4,800600Feet *Under Proposed Conditions 1. 2. 3. Full Parcel Boundary The Part of Industrial Parcels Eligible for 3rd Shift*´ Industrial Parcels to BecomeEligible for Third Shift 0 300 600 900150Feet *Under Proposed Conditions 1. Parcel Owner: Block Builders Llp. Parcel ID: 0811721320051 INSET 1. Full Parcel Boundary The Part of Industrial Parcels Eligible for 3rd Shift*´ Industrial Parcels to BecomeEligible for Third Shift 0 600 1,200 1,800300Feet *Under Proposed Conditions 2.Parcel Owner: City of St. Louis ParkParcel ID: 0911721220007 INSET 2. Parcel Owner: Westside Partners LllpParcel ID: 0911721240096 Full Parcel Boundary The Part of Industrial Parcels Eligible for 3rd Shift*´ Industrial Parcels to BecomeEligible for Third Shift 0 300 600 900 1,200 1,500150Feet *Under Proposed Conditions 3.Parcel Owner: Diamond Hill Center LlpParcel ID: 0602824120178 INSET 3. Parcel Owner: PS Mid West One LlcParcel ID: 0602824140099 SBP Associates, Inc.SBP Associates, Inc.SBP Associates, Inc.SBP Associates, Inc. 22502 Beach Road Deerwood, MN 56444 Phone: 952-920-1500 November 30, 2016 Mr. Matt Fiala Lyman Roofing and Siding 5320 West 23rd Street, Suite 180 St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Dear Mr. Fiala: Re: Noise Study Results Lyman Roofing and Siding (Lyman) in St. Louis Park, Minnesota contracted with SBP Associates, Inc. (SBP) to conduct noise monitoring to identify the noise impacts of its operations on nearby residences, relative to City and State noise standards. This letter presents the results of this noise monitoring study. Noise Descriptors and Minnesota Noise Rules The State of Minnesota and City of St. Louis Park have noise standards that are designed to be consistent with sleep, speech, annoyance, and hearing conservation requirements for receivers within areas grouped according to land use activities. The Minnesota standards are as follows: 7:00 AM to 10:00 PM 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM L10 L50 L10 L50 NAC-1 (Residential) 65 60 55 50 NAC-2 (Commercial) 70 65 70 65 NAC-3 (Industrial) 80 75 80 75 L10 means the sound level which is exceeded for 10 percent of the time for a one-hour period. L50 means the sound level which is exceeded 50 percent of the time for a one-hour period. Sound levels are expressed in dBA. A dBA is a unit of sound level expressed in decibels and weighted for the purpose of approximating the human response to sound. The impact of the Lyman operations noise on a residential area is limited by the NAC-1 values. Lyman and Area Noise Sources Sources of noise at the Lyman facility include vehicles entering and leaving the facility, fans/motors in the building that are part of a manufacturing process, and fork lifts that are used to load and unload delivery trucks. Background noise levels are primarily defined by noise from Highway 100 traffic. Test Equipment Testing was conducted with a Type 1 CEL Model 593 analyzer. The analyzer was field calibrated prior to and after each test period. Testing was conducted according to MPCA rules. Noise Monitoring Location Noise monitoring was conducted at a location on facility property that is adjacent to the nearest residential area. The monitoring location is shown in the attached figure. Noise Monitoring Results and Lyman Impacts Monitoring Conditions Noise monitoring was conducted on November 11, 2016. Four separate hours of noise monitoring were conducted to reflect various operating conditions. • The first hour of monitoring was conducted with the doors to the processing area open representing a worst-case condition in terms of the manufacturing operations. • The second hour of noise monitoring was conducted with the doors to the manufacturing operations closed. • The last two hours of monitoring were conducted with truck loading/unloading operations taking place, which included the noise from two fork lifts. Background Noise – Highway 100 The background noise impacts in the area are dominated by Highway 100 traffic. In order to determine the impacts of Lyman relative to the Standards, it is necessary to account for these impacts. The impacts of the noise from Highway 100 vary depending upon traffic conditions and meterological conditions. Based on spot checks of the noise levels during the monitoring it was found that the measured L90 noise level was a good approximation of these impacts. Therefore, the L90 noise levels were subtracted from the monitoring results to determine the impacts of the Lyman facility operations. Distance to Nearest Residence The distance from the monitoring location to the Lyman operations is approximately 425 feet, and the distance to the nearest resident to the Lyman operations is 600 feet. Based on spherical spreading of noise from the Lyman operations, the noise impacts at the residence would be 3 dBA less than the level measured at the monitoring location. Lyman Roofing and Siding Noise Monitoring Study Results – November 11, 2016 Test Start Time Measured Noise Levels Lyman Impacts at Monitoring Location(1) Adjustment for Distance to Residence(2) Lyman Impacts at Residence L10 L50 L90 L10 L50 L10 L50 L10 L50 1 2:50pm 52.5 49.5 48.0 50.6 44.2 -3.0 -3.0 47.6 41.2 2 4:08pm 53.0 50.0 48.5 51.1 44.7 -3.0 -3.0 48.1 41.7 3 5:30pm 54.5 52.5 50.5 52.3 48.2 -3.0 -3.0 49.3 45.2 4 6:35pm 57.5 55.5 54.0 54.9 50.2 -3.0 -3.0 51.9 47.2 (1) Measured L10 and L50 adjusted for background noise from Highway 100 represented by the measured L90 value. (2) Based on spherical spreading of noise from a point source and a distance to the monitoring location of 425 feet and a distance to the residence of 600 feet. Conclusions The monitoring study results demonstrate that the Lyman operations encountered during the monitoring period are within State and City Standards for daytime and nighttime operations. Please feel free to contact me with any questions you may have regarding this noise study. Sincerely, Stephen Platisha, P.E.