7.6. SR 01-16-1996ITEM 7.6.
"ty of
E,
ver
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Mayor and City Council
Kendra Lindahl, Zoning Assista~
January 16, 1996
SUBJECT:
Amendment to Conditional Use Permits,
Larry Rohlf, Public Hearing,
Case No. CU 95-28
Request
Mr. Rohlf is requesting that the speed limit and directional sign requirements be
removed from his mini-storage conditional use permits (CU 89-10 and CU 90-
07).
Location
11885 and 11869 - 192 1/2 Avenue NW, Lots 2 and 3, Block 1, Ridgewood East
2nd Addition
Zoning/Land Use
R3 (Townhouse/Multiple Family Residential)/MR (Medium Density Residential)
Attachments
· Memo to Planning Commission dated December 19, 1995
Background
Mr. Rohlf received two conditional use permits for his mini-storage located on
Lots 2 and 3, Block 1, Ridgewood East 2nd Addition. The CUPs were issued in
1990 and 1989 respectively. The permits had a number of conditions attached to
them. In late August 1995, a complaint was received that the property still had
not met its CUP conditions. Staff inspected the property and found that there
were three conditions not yet met:
13065 Orono Parkway · P.O. Box 490 · Elk River, MN 55330 · (612) 441-7420 · Fax: (612) 441-7425
1. The 5 mph speed limit signs were not posted on either lot
2. The "exit only" and "enter only" signs were not installed on either lot
3. The planting of nine (9) trees on Lot 2 and ten (10) trees on Lot 3, according
to the drainage plans, was not yet completed
Mr. Rohlf feels that he has met the tree requirements, but that the signage
requirements are unfair and should be removed from his CUP conditions.
Mr. Rohlf addressed the Council during the open mike section of its October 16,
1995 meeting, requesting that Council amend his CUP so that he would not be
required to place the signs on his property or add any more trees. Attorney
Peter Beck indicated that a CUP amendment would be needed to amend the
conditional use permits.
Since the October 16th Council meeting, Mr. Rohlf and I inspected his site
together. On November 6, 1995, I made a videotape of the site per Council's
request. Mr. Rohlfpointed out 10 trees he planted on Lot 3 and 11 trees that he
planted on Lot 2. His CUP required that he plant 19 trees on the lots. The City
Ordinance requires that the site have a total of 25 trees. With credit for existing
trees plus the 21 he planted, Mr. Rohlf has an adequate number of trees on the
lots and the tree requirements for his CUPs have been met.
However, it should be noted that the City Ordinance and Mr. Rohlfs CUP both
mention that specific kinds of trees be planted--Mr. Rohlf did not follow those
requirements. The Ordinance also specifies the minimum size of trees, and
several of Mr. Rohlfs trees do not meet those minimum requirements.
The ordinance also states that it is the responsibility of the property owner to
replace any dead trees. If any of Mr. Rohlfs trees do die, he must replace the
trees with trees that meet the City standards. Also, not more than 50% of the
trees may be of one species. Since most of the trees on the site are now willows,
if any trees die they shall be replaced with a different tree species in order to
comply with the Elk River Ordinance requirements.
Mr. Rohlf is requesting that the requirements for the "exit only", "enter only"
and speed limit signs be removed from the conditions of his two CUP permits
(CU 90-07 and CU 89-10).
I have inspected Mr. Rohlfs site numerous times between August and December
and I have never seen more that one vehicle on the site at a time. I do not
believe that removing the sign requirements will have a detrimental effect on
the site.
S:\PLANNING\KENDRA\CU95-28.DOC
Planning Commission Recommendation
At their December 19, 1995, meeting, the Planning Commission recommended
amending CU 89-10 and CU 90-07 to eliminate the sign requirements.
However, since it is the owner's responsibility to replace dead trees, the
Planning Commission recommends that all replacement trees be of a size and
species that will help the property meet the most current landscaping ordinance.
Recommendation
Staff and the Planning Commission recommend amending CU 89-10 and CU 90-
07 to eliminate the 5 mph speed limit signs and the "enter only" and "exit only"
signs requirements at Pete's Mini-Storage with the following condition:
1. Further landscaping needed shall meet the standards of the most current
ordinance.
S:\PLANNING\KENDRA\CU95-28.DOC
~ity of
ver
I'r]~M NO. 6:1.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Planning Commission
Kendra Lindahl, Zoning Assistan~
December 19, 1995
SUBJECT: Amendment to Conditional Use Permits,
Larry Rohlf, Public Hearing,
Case No. CU 95-28
Request
Mr. Rohlf is requesting that the speed limit and directional sign requirements be
removed from his mini-storage conditional use permits (CU 89-10 and CU 90-
07).
Location
11885 and 11869 - 192 1/2 Street NW, Lots 2 and 3, Block 1, Ridgewood East
2nd AdditiOn
Zoning/Land Use
R3 (TownhousefMultiple Family Residential)/MR (Medium Density Residential)
Attachments
· Zoning Map
· Approved Drainage/landscaping plans for CU 89-10 and CU 90-07
· CUP non-compliance letter dated September 1, 1995
· CUP non-compliance letter dated July 1, 1992
· Conditions for CU 89-10 and CU 90-07
· Section 900.30(4)(B)(iii) of the City Ordinance
Backzround
Mr. Rohlf received two conditional use permits for his mini-storage located on
Lots 2 and 3, Block 1, Ridgewood East 2nd Addition. The CUPs were issued in
13065 Orono Parkway · P.O. Box 490 · Elk River, MN 55330 · (612) 441-7420 · Fax: (612) 441-7425
1990 and 1989 respectively. The permits had a number of conditions attached to
them. In 1992, Janelle Szklarski inspected the site in accordance with the two
year review of conditional use permits and found four conditions that were not
met. I have attached a copy of her letter dated July 1, 1992.
In late August 1995, a complaint was received that the property still had not
met its CUP conditions. Staff inspected the property and found that there were
still three conditions not met:
1. The 5 mph speed hmit signs were nor posted on either lot
2. The "exit only" and "enter only" signs were not installed on either lot
3. The planting of nine (9) trees on Lot 2 and ten (10) trees on Lot 3, according
to the drainage plans, was not yet completed
I sent Mr. Rohlf a letter asking him to comply with the remaining three
conditions prior to October 1, 1995. I reinspected after that date and found that
the three conditions were still not met. I called Mr. Rohlf and agreed to meet
him at the site to look at the trees and discuss his CUP conditions. Mr. Rohlf
feels that he has met the tree requirements, but that the signage requirements
are unfair and should be removed from his CUP conditions.
Mr. Rohlf addressed the Council during the open mike section of its October 16,
1995 meeting, requesting that Council amend his CUP so that he will not be
required to place the signs on his property or add any more trees. Attorney
Peter Beck indicated that a CUP amendment would be needed to amend the
conditional use permits.
Since the October 16th Council meeting, Mr. Rohlf and I inspected his site
together. He pointed out 10 trees he planted on Lot 3 and 11 trees that he
planted on Lot 2. His CUP required that he plant 19 trees on the lots. The City
Ordinance requires that the site have a total of 25 trees. With credit for existing
trees plus the 21 he planted Mr. Rohlf has an adequate number of trees on the
lots.
However, it should be noted that the City Ordinance and Mr. Rohlfs CUP both
mention that specific kinds of trees be planted--Mr. Rohlf did not follow those
requirements. The Ordinance also specifies the minimum size of trees, and
several of Mr. Rohlfs trees do not meet those minimum requirements. I have
attached a copy of the landscaping requirements from Section 900.30(4)(B)(iii) of
the City Ordinance.
The ordinance also states that it is the responsibility of the property owner to
replace any dead trees. If any of Mr. Rohlfs trees do die, he must replace the
trees with trees that meet the City standards. Also, not more than 50% of the
trees may be of one species. Since most of the trees on the site are now willows,
S:\PLANNING\KENDRA\CU95-28.DOC
if any trees die they shall be replaced with a different tree species in order to
comply with the Elk River Ordinance requirements.
Mr. Rohlf is requesting that the requirements for the "exit only", "enter only"
and speed limit signs be removed from the conditions of his two CUP permits
(CU 90-07 and CU 89-10).
Analysis
Inspection of two other mini-storage facilities in Elk River and theft CUPs
(issued in 1992 and 1993), shows that they were not required to place speed
hmit and "exit only" and "enter only" signs on theft property. However, both of
these sites were required to plant additional evergreens because of theft
screening abihty. Only one of the facilities appears to be in compliance with
theft CUP. The other mini-storage, although well maintained, has not planted
the trees required by the CUP. I spoke with the property owners at that mini-
storage as part of theft two year review. The owners indicated that they will
plant the evergreens on theft site prior to June 1, 1996.
I have inspected Mr. Rohlfs site numerous times between August and December
and I have never seen more that one vehicle on the site at a time. I do not
believe that removing the sign requirements will have a detrimental effect on
the site.
Recommendation
Staff recommends amending CU 90-07 and CU 89-10 to eliminate the 5 mph
speed limit signs and the "enter only" and "exit only" signs requirements at
Pete's Mini-Storage
S:\PLANNING\KENDRA\CU95.28.D OC
LOCATION
F~lc
City of
,lver
13065 Orono Parkway o P.O. Box 490
Elk River, MN 55330
ZONING
· MAP
CASE: CU 95-28
191ST LANE
EXII[BIT S
;I
I
Trees planted by Mr. Rohlf
Trees proposed to be planted in CUP
_.~U 90-07
LoT 1.
Or' v, /-'J~ 3
Trees Planted by Mr. Rohmf
.. '".~ ':-' '-Tre~s Proposed to; be .planted .in CUP ....
,~y of
iver
September 1, 1995
Larry Rohlf
12891 Meadowvale Road
Elk River, MN 55330
RE: CUP COMPLIANCE
Dear Mr. Rohlf:
I am writing this letter in regard to the Conditional Use Permits (CUP) for Lots 2 and 3, Block 1,
Ridgewood East 2nd Addition. The CUPs were issued in 1989 and 1990. I am enclosing copies of the
stipulations which were part of the conditional use permit approval for each of these facilities.
When I inspected the property this morning, I found the following conditions were not yet met:
1. The 5 mph speed limit sLo'~s were not yet posted on either tot
The "exit only" and "enter only" signs which were to direct traffic, were not yet installed
The planting of nine (9) trees on Lot 2 and the ten (10) trees on Lot 3 was not yet
completed.
The aforementioned conditions were brought to your attention in 1992, but they were never carded out.
These conditions should be met prior to October 1, 1995. If you have any questions, please feel free
to contact me at 441-4900. Your cooperation is greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,
Kendra Linc;ahl
Zoning Assistant
Ca:: ~ #95-54
er::'!osures
13065 Orono Parkway · P.O. Box 490 · Elk River, MN 55330 - (612) 441-7,420 · Fax: (612) 441-7425
!
C,~y ot~ .
'Elld R ver
July 1, 1992
Larry Rohlf
12891 Meadowvale Road
Elk River, MN 55330
Dear Mr. Rohlf:
I'm writing this letter in regards to the two year review of
your conditional use permits for the mini storages constructed
on Lots 2 and 3, Block 1, Ridgewood East 2nd Addition. The
conditional use permits were issued in 1990 and 1989
respectively. I am enclosing copies of'the stipulations which
were part of the conditional use pe_--mit approval for each of
these facilities.
On Monday, June 29, 1992, I inspected the property located on
191-1/2 Street and found that the following stipulations were
not yet met: .
The 5 mph speed limits signs were not yet posted on
lot.
either
2. Some of the disturbed areas on the east and west sides of
the property were not yet seeded with grass. In addition,
two more trees are needed on Lot 3'and five trees are
still needed on Lot 2 as per the landscaping requirements.
3. The "exit only" and "enter only" signs which were to
direct traffic were not yet installed.
4. A cross easement should be recorded between the two lots
for driveway purposes. A copy of this recorded easement
should be.given to the City.'
The aforementioned stipulations should be completed as soon as
possible. Please feel free to call me at 441-7420 if you have
any questions regarding these stipulations Your cooperation
is appreciated. - ·
Sincerely,
Janel!e SzklarsTri
Zoning Assistant
enclosure
720 Dodge Avenue N.W., Eik River, Minnesota 55330 (612) 441-7420
TO:
Iver
DATE:
COUNCIL ACTION
LARRY ROELF
STE~EN C. BJORK,
JULY 20, 1989
ZONING ASS!STANT~
CU 89-10
SUBJ. COUNCIL ACTION REGARDING CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT REQUEST
On June 19, 1989, the Elk River City Council heard your request
for a Conditional Use Permit to construct a mini storage facility
in the R-3 zone. The property in question is legally described
as Lot 3, Block 1, Ridgewood East 2nd Addition.
The City Council approved your request for the Conditional Use
Pe.~-mit with the following conditions:
1. Lighting shall be installed on the storage building with no
glare spillover to adjoining properties.
2. Reduced security lighting after hours of operation shall also
allow no glare spillover to adjoining properties.
Building material shall be subdued colors, comoatible with
The environment, and architecturally harmoniou~ with the neighboorhood.
The design and finish of the building shall be residential
in nature and compatible with the neighborhood.
The building shall have a shingled roof.
Applicant shall provide drainage retention eak~ment on Lot
2, approved by the City Engineer.
Speed limi~ to 5 mph shall be posted on Lot 3.
The driveway of Lot 3 shall be one way only.
Driveway and parking stalls shall be hardsurfaced with asphalt
or concrete.
!0. Areas net paved or built upon shall be seeded in grass.
11. Ten trees shall be planted on Lot 3, types and locations as
per description on drainage plan.
!2. Building and grouods shall be keot well maintained clean and
free of debris. ' , ,
!3. Signage shall not exceed maximum of four square feet
4. The projects aoorovat is contingent upon review and acceptance
of the drainag~'p!an by the City Enginner.
If you should have any questions regarding this action leas contact
m~ at 441-7420. ' , p e
11.
1'~.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
EXHiBiT A CU 90-07
LAP, RY ROELF CONDiTiONS
Lighting shall be installed on each of =he storage
buildings with no glare spillover to adjoining properties.
Reduced security lighting after hours of operation shall
also allow no glare spillover To adjoining properties.
Building materials shall be subdued colors compatible with
the environment and architecturally harmonious with the
neighborhood and the existing structure.
The design and finish of the building shall be residential
in nature and compatible with the neighborhood.
The building shall have a shingled roof.
A speed limit of five (5) mph shall be posted on Lot 2.
The driveway on Lot 2 shall accommodate one-way traffic
only and a cross easement with Lot 3 shall be recorded for
the joint use of the driveway on Lot 3. A copy of this
recorded easement shall be given to the CiTy.
Driveway and parking stalls shall be hard surfaced with
asphalt or concrete.
Areas not paved or built upon shall be seeded in grass.
Nine trees shall be planted on Lot 2, types and locations
as per description on site plan·
Building and grounds shall be kept well maintained, clean
and free of debris.
Sig~age shall not exceed a maximum of eight square feet·
The holding pond on Lot 2 should be slightly enlarged as
per the specifications of the City Engineer·
A two year review of the conditional use permit is
required.
T~at "Exit Only" and "Enter Only" signs be placed at the
curb cuts.
The applicant shall provide an easement across Lot 3 to
connect the holding ponds on Lot 2 and Lot 4. A copy of
t~e easement shall be given to the City·
A 65 foot easement on the north end of Lot 2 shall be
recorded for drainage-purposes. A copy of the recorded
easement shall be given to the City.
iii. Minimum Requirements. Ail open areas of a lot
which are not used and improved for required parking
areas, drives or storage shall be landscaped with a
combination of overstory trees, ornamental trees,
coniferous trees, shrubs, flowers, and turf or ground
cover materials. The number of trees on the lot,
tract, or parcel, shall not be less than the perimeter
of the described area as measured in feet divided by
forty (40).
a. Overstoz-f Trees. Fifty percent (50%) of the
required trees shall be overstory trees.
b. 9rnamental Trees. Twenty-five percent (25%)
of the required trees shall be ornamental trees.
c. Coniferous Trees. Twenty-five percent (25%)
of the required trees shall be coniferous trees.
d. In order to accomplish an adequate buffer
additional landscaDinq over and above the recu~ired
amount may be requested by the City.
e. Minimum Size and Root Condition of Required
Trees.
t.) overstory trees: twO (2) inches in
diameter as measured six (6) inches above
the ground and trees must be balled and
burlapped.
2.) ornamental trees: one and one-half (1
1/2) inches in diameter as measured six (6)
inches above the ground and trees must be
balled and burlapped.
3.) coniferous trees: six (6) feet in
height and trees must be balled and
burlapped. '
Species.
i.) all required trees shall be comprised
of species which are classified as
overstory, ornamental, and coniferous trees
by the American Nurseryman's Association.
2.) not more than 50 percent (50%) of the
re_cuired number of overstory or ornamental
trees shall be comprised of one species.
9.116
3.) all plant materials shall be
indigenous to the hardiness zone of the area
in which the City is located. The use of
drought tolerant plant materials are
encouraged to meet landscaping requirements.
g. Credit for Over~izing Required Trees. The
total number of required overstory trees may be
reduced by one tree for each new deciduous tree
measuring four and one-half (4-1/2) inches or more
in diameter, or each new coniferous tree measuring
ten (10) feet or more in height, which is planted
on the lot or tract. In no event, however, shall
this credit result in a reduction in th~ total
number of required trees by more than twenty-five
percent (25%).
h. Credit for Existing Trees. The total number
of required new trees may be offset by the
retention of existing trees on the lot provided
that such trees satisfy the requirements of this
section as to size and species. A sliding scale
shall be used to determine the amount of
credit for existing trees. Existing trees
between four (4) inches in diameter and less than
eight (8) inches in diameter will receive
credit for one (1) tree. Existing trees eight (8)
inches in diameter or greater will receive
credit for two (2) trees. Credit can not exceed
fifty percent (50%) of the total requirement.
i. Maintenance. The property owner of the lot
upon which required landscaping or screening is
located shall maintain all materials in a sightly
and healthy growing condition.
j. Placement of Plant Materials.
1.) Ail required landscaping shall be
located on the lot occupied by the use,
building, facility, or structures. No
landscaping shall be located within any
public right-of-way unless approved by the
City.
2.) Plant materials shall be located to
provide reasonable access to all utilities.
9.117
o
o
3.) At all intersections, Sight Visibility
triangles shall be kept clear of landscape
materials that would obstruct the sight
lines of motorists at intersecting streets.
~nforcement.
A. Installation. All landscape improvements required by
this subsection shall be installed by the owner no later than
one year after the issuance .of a building permit for the
subject property.
Replacement of any dead trees, shrubs, ground covers and
sodding shall be responsibility of the property owner.
B. ~. Twelve (12) months after the date of
issuance of a building permit, the City may conduct a field
inspection of the subject site to assure compliance with the
requirements of this ordinance and implementation of the
approved landscape plan.
C. Exceptions and Adjustments. Where a strict application
of this subsection is not possible due to unique topographic
landform, irregular lot shape or historic features worthy of
preservation, the applicant may present an alternative
landscape and screening plan to the City for alternate
approval.
D. Performance Guarante,. if required landscape
improvements have not been completed at the time a
certificate is requested for occupancy of a property, a
financial guarantee to ensure completion of the improvements
shall be supplied prior to issuance of the certificate of
occupancy. The financial _~uarantee shall be in an amount
equal to approximately 50% of the value of the uncompleted
landscape improvements, and shall be released upon compleuion
of the required landscape improvements. Developers who have
posted a previous financial guarantee in connection with the
installation of public improvements shall not be required to
post a separate guarantee, but the financial guarantee shall
remain in place in an amount equal to approximately 50% of
the value of uncompleted landscape improvements until all
required landscape improvements are completed.
.Interior Parking Area
A. Ail off-street parking areas shall include unpaved,
landscaped islands that are reasonably distributed throughout
9.118