Planning Commission

AGENDA Planning Commission REGULAR MEETING March 7, 2024 7:00 PM Oakdale City Council Chambers 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. CALL OF ROLL 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 6. OPEN FORUM 7. PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW a. OLD BUSINESS i. Approval of the 2024 Planning Commission Work Plan b. NEW BUSINESS i. Public Hearing – Mai Lee, 4423 Helena Way North – Conditional Use Permit for a Home Occupation (Hair Salon) ii. Public Hearing – Don Henrichs, 4030 Granada Avenue North – Conditional Use Permit for a Second Garage 8. OTHER i. Staff liaison update(s)* ii. Commissioner update(s)* iii. Council liaison update(s)* 9. ADJOURNMENT *Items marked with an asterisk have no accompanying material. The next regular Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for April 4, 2024 @ 7PM in the Council Chambers at Oakdale City Hall. 1  PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF OAKDALE February 1, 2024 The Oakdale Planning Commission held a meeting on Thursday, February 1, 2024 at Oakdale City Hall, 1584 Hadley Avenue North, Oakdale, Minnesota. The meeting began at 6:30 PM with the Planning Commission appreciation dinner hosted by the City Council. Informal discussion with the City Council occurred during the appreciation dinner regarding the annual work plan and future of the Planning Commission. The following were present: Mayor Zabel Council Member Ingebrigtson Council Member Morcomb Council Member Willenbring Chair Pierson Vice-Chair Willenbring Commissioner Campbell Commissioner Stolarski Commissioner McCauley Commissioner Hagen Community Development Director Gitzlaff City Planner McClanahan The meeting began with introductions. Mayor Zabel expressed appreciation for the Planning Commission, as they have been very busy over the past few years. Mayor Zabel gave a high-level overview of the workplan and its purpose in guiding the Commission’s work, and noted that one of the major projects for 2024 is updating the City’s subdivision and zoning ordinance. Mayor Zabel asked the Commission if there were any suggested changes to the workplan. Commissioner Campbell stated that as a real estate developer, he appreciates that the City is looking to update the ordinance. Mayor Zabel acknowledged that times have changed, particularly in response to COVID-19, and the City should take a look at regulations that were adopted many years ago. Council Member Ingebrigtson commented that the State Legislature is exploring eliminating parking minimums, as an example. In response to Council Member Ingebrigtson’s question about hiring a consultant for the Code update project, City Planner Luke McClanahan stated that City staff is still deciding between two qualified consulting firms. In response to the Mayor’s question about the process flow of the project, McClanahan stated that the updates will likely be brought to the City advisory boards and City Council in chunks or in phases for review. McClanahan also stated that strategic public engagement will occur to gather public input to help improve the ordinance. Commissioner Campbell expressed a strong interest in the project. Council Member Ingebrigtson stated that the Code update project is probably the most unique item within the Planning Commission’s work plan. In response to Commissioner Campbell’s question about staff’s approach to the Code update project, McClanahan stated that staff has kept a running list over the past two years of key topics and complex issues to address in the Code update. Community Development Director Gitzlaff also stated that other priorities of the project include 2 Planning Commission Minutes February 1, 2024 Page 2 ensuring the ordinance is compliant with applicable laws. Gitzlaff also stated that the consultant will be expected to pull examples from other communities that can be implemented in Oakdale. Council Member Ingebrigtson expressed appreciation to the Planning Commission for asking good questions and having good discussion when they review various proposals. Council Member Willenbring stated that she learns a lot from watching the Commission meetings. Mayor Zabel agreed that the Planning Commission’s discussions are invaluable. In response to the Mayor’s question about what the City Council or City staff can do to help, Commissioner Campbell asked that the City explore options for better handling after-the-fact Conditional Use Permits in which the Commission feels obligated to recommend approval for structures that have already been built. Mayor Zabel agreed that the City should look into different options available for handling these types of situations. Mayor Zabel thanked the Commission again for their work. The Planning Commission then moved to the dais for continuation of regular business and broadcasting. CALL OF ROLL On a call of roll, the following were present: Chairperson: Dallas Pierson Commissioners: Tom Willenbring Christopher Campbell Lee Stolarski Michael McCauley Janet Hagen Also Present: Luke McClanahan, City Planner Andrew Gitzlaff, Community Development Director Jake Ingebrigtson, City Council Liaison Kevin Zabel, Mayor Susan Willenbring, Council Member Andy Morcomb, Council Member Kim Lindquist, WSB Daniel Zimlich, 7532 31st St N Michelle Cosgrove, 7680 31st St N Dylan Cosgrove, 7680 31st St N Not Present: Yaya Diatta, Commissioner PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3 Planning Commission Minutes February 1, 2024 Page 3 APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA Chair Pierson requested to move item 7, the open forum, to follow item 8.b.i, Planning Commission new business. COMMISSIONER STOLARSKI MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WILLENBRING, TO AMEND THE AGENDA BY MOVING ITEM 7 TO FOLLOW ITEM 8.b.i. VOTED IN FAVOR: Chair Pierson AYE Commissioner Willenbring AYE Commissioner McCauley AYE Commissioner Stolarski AYE Commissioner Hagen AYE Commissioner Campbell AYE 6 Ayes. Motion approved. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER WILLENBRING, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER STOLARSKI, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 4, 2024 AS PRESENTED. VOTED IN FAVOR: Chair Pierson AYE Commissioner Willenbring AYE Commissioner McCauley AYE Commissioner Stolarski AYE Commissioner Hagen AYE Commissioner Campbell AYE 6 Ayes. Motion approved. PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW a. OLD BUSINESS (none) b. NEW BUSINESS i. OAKDALE MARKETPLACE AND OAKDALE STATION PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS STUDY Luke McClanahan, City Planner, provided an overview of the study area, which is bounded by Interstate 694, 34th Street N, Ideal Avenue North, and the Union Pacific railroad. The area was 4 Planning Commission Minutes February 1, 2024 Page 4 originally planned in the mid-2000s. Since then, much has changed in the area and the economy has also changed. There is renewed development interest in the area. A concept plan for a tire business and financial institution was brought to the City Council in August 2023. In response to the concept plan, the City Council directed City staff to conduct a study of the area. The City has hired WSB to help prepare the study. Kim Lindquist, Director of Community Planning for WSB, provided an overview of her background and her firm. The purpose of the study is to understand the preferences and concerns of key stakeholders for the study area. The project team has met with property owners, business owners, and real estate brokers familiar with the area. The Planning Commission is being asked the same questions as the other stakeholders as part of the data collection process. Information will be aggregated from respondents, and the goal is to formulate recommendations to amend the Planned Unit Developments. Ms. Lindquist noted that information was distributed to the Commission regarding demographics and restaurants. Findings from the research conducted thus far indicates that attracting sit-down restaurants is difficult under current market conditions. There is an interest for fast-casual restaurants for the area. In response to Chair Pierson’s question about the definition of a fast-casual restaurant, Ms. Lindquist said they are in between fast food and sit-down restaurants. In response to Ms. Lindquist’s question about the Commissioners’ experience with the area, Commissioner Willenbring said the area is a mix-match of uses and is not a cohesive development. The internal road network can be confusing. Commissioner Campbell agreed that it is not a cohesive area, and typically people go to one store there and then leave. Commissioner Hagen stated that the road network is not the best design. Commissioner Campbell said there is not a cohesive signage plan. Wayfinding signage would be helpful. Ms. Lindquist said that previous feedback from stakeholders suggested that additional signage off I-694 would benefit the area as a whole. In response to a question from Commissioner Campbell, Mr. McClanahan said that the three- remaining developable, vacant parcels are owned by two different entities. In response to Ms. Lindquist’s question about what the Commission likes about the area and what type of amenities are missing, Chair Pierson said that PINZ is the only non-fast food restaurant in the area. Commissioner Hagen said a bakery would be a good asset. Ms. Lindquist said that there are private restrictions that limits certain business uses in the area. Chair Pierson said he goes to LA Fitness often. Commissioner Stolarski said that she does not shop in the area much, and tends to go to Woodbury. Chair Pierson said pedestrian improvements across 34th Street N are missing. In response to Ms. Lindquist’s question about what type of uses would do well or would be successful in the area, Commissioner Hagen said a community garden is missing. Commissioner 5 Planning Commission Minutes February 1, 2024 Page 5 Campbell said this area serves more as a neighborhood commercial site where people would, for example, go to get their hair cut or order food. And it is unlikely that a big box store would locate there. Chair Pierson suggested that a UPS office or similar store would do well. In response to Ms. Lindquist’s question about uses that the Commission would not want to see in the area, Chair Pierson said that offices would not do well. Commissioner Campbell said that fast food restaurants are not preferred. Commissioner Willenbring said there does not need to be more auto parts stores. In response to Ms. Lindquist’s question about how the City can assist existing businesses and attract businesses to the area, Chair Pierson suggested small business loans may be an option. Commissioner Campbell said that incentives do not always sway business deals, but may be moderately helpful in some instances. Based on his experience, Commissioner Campbell said the City does a good job working with developers compared to other municipalities. Ms. Lindquist asked a follow up question about whether the City should wait for the right opportunity for commercial development in the future or if they should act on current development proposals. Chair Pierson stated that there will be hundreds of nearby, new dwelling units opening soon. With those new residents, there will be a desire for shopping within walking distance. Commissioner McCauley said the city waited many years for the Oakdale Mall to leave, and when it did, Hy-Vee came along and brought a lot of change. Similarly, waiting for the right opportunity can be beneficial for the study area. Once the residential buildout occurs, there will be more commercial demand. Commissioner Campbell said he is not opposed to having more residential in the area, but if the right commercial project comes along, it should be given consideration. A mixed use building with first floor commercial and residential units above it would be a good fit. PUBLIC FORUM Chair Pierson opened the public forum. Daniel Zimlich, 7532 31st St N, a resident of the nearby Anna’s Grove subdivision, expressed disappointment in the current multifamily development (The Harlan) being built in Oakdale Marketplace. When the area was initially planned, the vision was to develop it for commercial uses. Mr. Zimlich said there are few businesses in the area currently and his family would like a new restaurant there. He is opposed to more apartments. There may be opportunity for a community garden. Dylan and Michelle Cosgrove, 7680 31st St N, residents of the nearby Anna’s Grove subdivision, said they tend to agree with the comments stated by the Commission. Ms. Cosgrove said she only goes to Target, LA Fitness, and Allina Health, and would like to see more businesses. She would like to see more local businesses like a bakery, meat shop, or brewery. Other preferred uses include a community garden and pool, if reasonably priced. Mr. Cosgrove said the area lacks a cohesive look. Some of the infrastructure has atrophied over the past 20 years, but there are good trails. Refreshing curbs, sidewalks, and pedestrian improvements would be beneficial. Ms. Cosgrove reemphasized her preference for local shops such as boutiques, thrift shops, and 6 Planning Commission Minutes February 1, 2024 Page 6 fast casual restaurants. Ms. Cosgrove said they do not want to see more residential development in the area. Chair Pierson closed the public forum. OTHER BUSINESS i. Planning and Development Updates Mr. McClanahan said to expect a March Planning Commission meeting. Mr. McClanahan gave updates on the City’s proposed Public Works facility and the Twin Cities Towing land use application. ii. Commissioner Updates There were no updates. iii. Council Liaison Updates Council Member Ingebrigtson did not have any updates for the Commission but was available for questions. There were no questions. ADJOURNMENT A MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER WILLENBRING, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CAMPBELL, TO ADJOURN THE FEBRUARY 1, 2024 MEETING OF THE OAKDALE PLANNING COMMISSION AT 7:45 PM. VOTED IN FAVOR: Chair Pierson AYE Commissioner Willenbring AYE Commissioner Campbell AYE Commissioner Stolarski AYE Commissioner McCauley AYE Commissioner Hagen AYE 6 Ayes. Motion approved. Respectfully submitted, Luke McClanahan City Planner 7  PLANNING COMMISSION MEMO To: Oakdale Planning Commission Meeting Date: March 7, 2024 Request(s): 2024 Planning Commission Work Plan Prepared/Presented: Luke McClanahan, City Planner BACKGROUND The Planning Commission’s (PC) role is to advise the City Council in matters pertaining to planning and zoning and provide recommendations on development applications, amendments to Chapter 25 – Zoning of the City’s Code of Ordinances, and land use plans. A work plan has been prepared to further guide the Commission’s efforts for the calendar year. The work plan is informed by the 2040 Comprehensive Plan and best practices in planning and development. The work plan was discussed at the February 1, 2024 PC dinner with the City Council. The City Council also reviewed the work plan at their February 13, 2023 workshop meeting. The City Council did not recommend any changes to the work plan. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION REQUESTED It is requested that the Planning Commission approve their 2024 work plan. Attachment: 2024 Planning Commission Work Plan 8 1  2024 Planning Commission Work Plan Reference Title Description/Tasks Document 1. Review development applications (Rezonings, City Ordinance – Subdivisions, Site Plans, Variances, PUDs, CUPs, IUPs, Development Chapter 25: Zoning Comp Plan Amendments, Appeals, Ordinance Text Applications and Chapter 21: Amendments,). Subdivisions 2. Provide recommendations to the City Council. 1. Review and provide feedback/recommendations on Comprehensive Studies, Plans, the Oakdale Marketplace/Oakdale Station PUD study Plan – Land Use and Programs and 14th and Geneva Redevelopment Site Analysis. Chapter 2. Review and provide feedback on other plans. Comprehensive Plan – Land Use 1. Gather input from the Commission on various Chapter ordinance updates to modernize Chapters 21 – Ordinance Subdivision and 25 – Zoning. Updates League of 2. Provide a recommendation to the City Council for Minnesota Cities proposed amendments to the Ordinance. Publications 1. Participate in City sponsored educational events or trainings as provided (e.g., Development Bus Tour). Commissioner 2. Incorporate educational opportunities into regular Education N/A meetings as appropriate. 3. Review memos provided by staff on various topics of interest (e.g., mixed use development). City of Oakdale ● 1584 Hadley Avenue N, Oakdale, MN 55128 www.oakdalemn.gov ● 651-739-5086 9  PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT To: Oakdale Planning Commission Meeting Date: March 7, 2024 Applicant: Mai Lee, Samlivan Salon LLC Location: 4423 Helena Way North Request(s): Conditional Use Permit for a Home Occupation (Hair Salon) Prepared/Presented: Max Lohse, Community Development Specialist INTRODUCTION Mai Lee of Samlivan Salon LLC is requesting a Conditional Use Permit for a home occupation at 4423 Helena Way North. The applicant is seeking to operate a single-station hair salon for one to two clients per day. The salon would operate by appointment only between 8:00 AM to 2:00 PM and 4:00 PM to 8:00 PM. Clients would park in the applicant’s driveway and access the salon through a dedicated entrance. Location Map – Lee / Samlivan Salon LLC Conditional Use Permit COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION The subject property is guided Low Density Residential per the City’s Comprehensive Plan. ZONING DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS The subject property is zoned R-4 Mid-Density Housing, where home occupations are listed as a Conditional Use. The designations of the surrounding property are displayed in the table below: 10 1  Orientation Comprehensive Plan Zoning District Existing Use North Low Density Residential, R4 – Mid-Density Housing Residential, Wetland Open Space South Low Density Residential R4 – Mid-Density Housing Residential East Open Space R4 – Mid-Density Housing Wetland West Low Density Residential R4 – Mid-Density Housing Residential ANALYSIS The zoning ordinance states the following (Sec. 25-3-900(a)): A conditional use is a permitted use that is allowed only when it is shown that the use meets certain general and specific standards related to the proposed conditional use. Conditional uses must meet all seven (7) general criteria in order for a permit to be approved. This allows the City to review the potential impact(s) the use may have and ensure that the use is consistent with the vision for the area in the City’s Comprehensive Plan. General Criterial for Granting a Conditional Use Permit. The general criteria for granting a conditional use permit (applicable to all conditional use permit requests) is listed in Section 25-3-900(g) of the Zoning Code. The conditional use is evaluated according to the following criteria: (1) The conditional use will be in conformity with the City’s comprehensive plan and with the purpose, intent and applicable standards of this Ordinance. • The proposed use is in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan, as the property is guided low-density residential, and home occupations are permitted in residential zoning districts provided certain conditions are met. This condition is met. (2) The conditional use shall be located, designated, maintained and operated to be compatible with the existing or intended character of that zoning district in which it is located. • The home occupation will take place entirely within the applicant’s home and will not alter the residential character of the area. This condition is met. (3) The use shall not be hazardous, detrimental or disturbing to present and potential surrounding land uses due to noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes, water pollution, vibration, general unsightliness or other nuisances. • The proposed home occupation, a hair salon, is not anticipated to generate any nuisance conditions. As a licensed cosmetologist, the applicant must follow Minnesota Board of Cosmetology regulations for residential salons, which include cleanliness and disposal standards, disinfection procedures, ventilation requirements, and separation of the salon space from residential living areas. This condition is met. (4) The use shall not create traffic congestion, unsafe access or parking needs that will cause inconveniences to the adjoining properties. • The proposed home occupation is not anticipated to create traffic issues. The applicant’s driveway has capacity for six cars, and the applicant reports that only one client will be served at a time. This condition is met. 11 2  (5) The use shall be served adequately by essential public services, such as streets, police, fire protection and utilities. • The existing home is served adequately by public services, and the proposed home occupation will not require additional services beyond those that can be provided by existing utilities. This condition is met. (6) The use shall not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and shall not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the city. • The proposed use should not create any additional requirements at public cost. This condition is met. (7) The use shall preserve and incorporate the site's natural and scenic features into the development design and cause minimal adverse environmental effects. • As all business will be conducted entirely within the applicant’s home, the proposed home occupation will not impact any natural features on the site and is not anticipated to cause any adverse environmental effects. This condition is met. In addition, some conditional uses have specific criteria that must be met which are intended to address potential issues that may arise associated with that type of use. If an application meets all of the criteria in the ordinance, then a conditional use permit shall be granted. Specific Conditional Use Permit Criteria for Home Occupations. The specific criteria for granting a conditional use permit for a home occupation is listed in Section 25-23(c)(2) of the Zoning Code; staff evaluation of the application follows the citations: (a) The home occupation shall be carried on by a member of the family residing in the dwelling unit, provided that the permit may allow not more than one employee who is not part of the family. • The applicant will reside in the home and be the sole employee of the business. This condition is met. (b) The home occupation shall be carried on wholly within the principal or accessory structures. • The proposed home occupation will occur entirely within the applicant’s home. This condition is met. (c) Noticeable noise, vibration, smoke, dust, electrical disturbance, odors, heat, or glare shall not be produced. • All salon activity will take place within a dedicated portion of the applicant’s home, preventing noise externalities. Additionally, the applicant will follow Minnesota Board of Cosmetology regulations for residential salons, which includes provisions for cleanliness and disposal standards, disinfection procedures, and ventilation requirements as to prevent nuisance conditions. This condition is met. (d) Hours and intensity of operation may be limited and shall be set forth in the Conditional Use Permit. • The applicant is proposing to operate the business daily from 8 AM to 2 PM and 4 PM to 8 PM. Additionally, the applicant plans to see only one to two clients per day. These hours and operations are not anticipated to have a negative impact on adjacent residential properties. This condition is met. 12 3  (e) On-site advertising may be limited or prohibited and any restrictions thereon shall be set forth in the Conditional Use Permit. • The applicant will need to seek City approval prior to installing any signage. Any signage posted on the property must comply with the Ordinance requirements. This condition is met. (f) If the home occupation requires a license, the restrictions imposed in the Conditional Use Permit shall become a part of such license; violations of either the license requirements or Conditional Use Permit shall cause forfeiture of both the license and the conditional use permit. • Minnesota Statutes Section 155A.22 requires any persons practicing cosmetology to hold a valid license from the Minnesota Board of Cosmetology. To ensure that the applicant maintains a valid license, a condition requiring that the applicant maintain a license may be added to the Conditional Use Permit. As a result, this criterion can be met through a condition of approval. 60-DAY RULE Application Deemed Complete: January 29, 2024 60-Day Review Deadline: March 29, 2024 Extension Granted To: N/A Planning Commission Meeting: March 7, 2024 Expected City Council Action: March 26, 2024 ROLE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION The role of the Planning Commission is to hold a public hearing and review the Conditional Use Permit request as it relates to the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance requirements and provide a recommendation to the City Council. RECOMMENDATION Staff has determined that the request for a Conditional Use Permit for a home occupation meets the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. Staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit, subject to conditions in the draft resolution. MOTION Motion to recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit for a home occupation (hair salon) at 4423 Helena Way North. Attachments: Development Checklist Applicant’s Narrative Applicant’s Site Plan Draft City Council Resolution 13 4  Development Checklist 4423 Helena Way North - Conditional Use Permit Project name Lee Conditional Use Permit Proposed use Home Occupation (Hair Salon) Existing site conditions Residential property Site access Existing access off Helena Way North Zoning R-4 (Mid Density Housing) Comprehensive Plan guidance Low Density Residential Is a Comprehensive Plan amendment required? No Any Zoning approvals anticipated? None beyond the CUP request Any Subdivision approvals anticipated? No Potential deviations from City Code (if a PUD)? No Any Variances requested? No Any financial incentives from the City being No requested by the developer? Has the developer met with the City’s No, but the application was reviewed by the DRC Development Review Committee? Has the developer submitted a formal Yes application? Any anticipated environmental impacts? None Has the developer met with the Planning The request will be heard as a public hearing item by Commission? the Planning Commission on March 7, 2024 Other jurisdiction approvals required Minnesota Board of Cosmetology City of Oakdale ● 1584 Hadley Avenue N, Oakdale, MN 55128 www.oakdalemn.gov ● 651-739-5086 14 Mai Lee Samlivan Salon LLC Residential Salon Description of operation : Hair Salon I (Mai) will be the only operator in the salon with 1-2 clients a day and 1 client during each appointment only. Hair Salon services will include the following: Women haircut, Hair coloring, Natural hair care treatments, and Hair extension application. Hours of Operation : Monday-Sunday: By appointment only Scheduling time: Mornings 8AM-2PM / Evenings 4PM-8PM Salon will be closed for all Holidays or may vary Work environment and Safety : • In compliance to all MN Cosmetology Board rules and regulations for residential salon • Business Insurance Coverage - Commercial and Professional liability • Functioning smoke alarms and carbon monoxide detectors • Accessible standard Fire extinguisher and first aid kit • Proper personal protective equipments (PPE) • Work environment has well ventilated HRV system including a dedicated window and ceiling fans for efficient air circulation • Adequate lighting throughout salon • Multiple Fire Escapes: Main salon door and window, Upper level door • Salon has it’s own dedicated entrance and exit door • Salon portioned away from residential living area • Commitment to maintaining seasonal hazardous-free business exterior: Snow removal, de-icing driveway and walkways, lawn care, etc… • Driveway has a capacity to park 6 vehicles • Work area has stain resistant vinyl flooring • Full bathroom dedicated for business • Isolated and designated hair washing station and sanitation area • Chemicals and tools stored and locked away when not in use 15 16  CITY OF OAKDALE RESOLUTION NO. 2024-xx A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A HOME OCCUPATION (HAIR SALON) AT 4423 HELENA WAY NORTH SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS. At a meeting of the City Council of the City of Oakdale held on Tuesday, March 26, 2024, at Oakdale City Hall, 1584 Hadley Avenue North, Oakdale, Minnesota, with the following members present: Mayor Kevin Zabel; Councilmembers Noah Her, Jake Ingebrigtson, Andy Morcomb, and Susan Willenbring, and the following members absent: None, the Oakdale City Council resolved: WHEREAS, Mai Lee has requested a Conditional Use Permit for a home occupation to operate a hair salon at 4423 Helena Way North, and WHEREAS, the property is zoned R-4 and is the applicant’s primary residence, and WHEREAS, the proposed home occupation meets the general and specific criteria in the zoning ordinance and complies with the comprehensive plan, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the request, and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Oakdale hereby approves the Conditional Use Permit for a home occupation (hair salon) at 4423 Helena Way North (Legal Description: Lot 10, Block 2, Heather Ridge 5th Addition) subject to the following conditions: 1. Hours of operation for the use shall be from 8:00 AM to 8:00 PM, Sunday through Saturday. 2. Parking for the use shall be conducted in a manner that does not obstruct the Right- of-Way. 3. No more than one (1) outside worker shall be employed for the use. 4. All signage for the use shall comply with Ordinance requirements. 5. The applicant shall maintain a valid license from the Minnesota Board of Cosmetology. 6. The applicant shall meet all regulations set by the Minnesota Board of Cosmetology for residential salons. Voting in Favor: Mayor Kevin Zabel; Councilmembers Noah Her, Jake Ingebrigtson, Andy Morcomb, and Susan Willenbring Voting Against: None Resolution duly seconded and passed this 26th day of March, 2024. _____________________________ Kevin Zabel, Mayor ______________________________ Sara Ludwig, City Clerk 17  PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT To: Oakdale Planning Commission Meeting Date: March 7, 2024 Applicant: Don Henrichs Location: 4030 Granada Avenue North Request(s): Conditional Use Permit for an Additional Accessory Structure Prepared/Presented: Max Lohse, Community Development Specialist LOCATION & REQUEST DETAILS Don Henrichs, the property owner and applicant, is proposing an additional accessory structure (garage) at 4030 Granada Avenue North. Per the City of Oakdale Code of Ordinances, Chapter 25, Article 6, Sec. 25-23 (c) (9), single family dwellings are allowed one garage by right, and additional garages are permitted via Conditional Use Permit. The proposed additional garage is planned to be up to 1,000 square feet in size. The subject property is approximately 1.8 acres and currently contains a single family home and one detached garage. Location Map – Henrichs Conditional Use Permit COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION The subject property is guided Low Density Residential per the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan. 18 1 ZONING DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS The subject property is zoned R-2 (Low-Density Housing). In accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, each single family dwelling is allowed one garage up to 1,000 square feet in size. An exception to this provision is allowed through approval of a Conditional Use Permit (City of Oakdale Code of Ordinances, Chapter 25, Article 6, Sec. 25-23 (c) (9)). The designations of the surrounding property are displayed in the table below: Orientation Comprehensive Plan Zoning District Existing Use North Low Density Residential R-2 Low-Density Housing Single Family Residential South Open Space Wetland Wetland East Low-Density Residential R-2 Low-Density Housing Single Family Residential West Park Wetland Wetland ANALYSIS The zoning ordinance states the following (Sec. 25-3-900(a)): A conditional use is a permitted use that is allowed only when it is shown that the use meets certain general and specific standards related to the proposed conditional use. All conditional uses must meet seven (7) general criteria in order for a permit to be approved. This allows the City to review the potential impact(s) the use may have and ensure that the use is consistent with the vision for the area in the City’s Comprehensive Plan. In addition, some conditional uses have specific criteria that must be met which are intended to address potential issues that may arise associated with that type of use. If an application meets all of the criteria in the ordinance, then a conditional use permit shall be granted. General Criterial for Granting a Conditional Use Permit. The general criteria for granting a conditional use permit (applicable to all conditional use permit requests) is listed in Section 25-3-900(g) of the Zoning Code. The conditional use is evaluated according to the following criteria: (1) The conditional use will be in conformity with the City’s comprehensive plan and with the purpose, intent and applicable standards of this Ordinance. • The use is in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan as the property is guided low- density residential and accessory structures are permitted in residential zoning districts, provided certain conditions are met. If the applicant obtains approval for this CUP request, and subsequently obtains a building permit, the proposed use would be compliant. This condition is met. (2) The conditional use shall be located, designated, maintained and operated to be compatible with the existing or intended character of that zoning district in which it is located. • The proposed accessory structure is located in a residential area where similar structures are present on nearby properties. Approval of this request should not alter the residential character of the area. This condition is met. (3) The use shall not be hazardous, detrimental or disturbing to present and potential surrounding land uses due to noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes, water pollution, vibration, general unsightliness or other nuisances. 19 2  • If this CUP request is approved, the applicant will also need to obtain a building permit for the use. The proposed use, an additional garage, is not anticipated to generate any nuisance conditions. This condition is met. (4) The use shall not create traffic congestion, unsafe access or parking needs that will cause inconveniences to the adjoining properties. • The proposed structure should not affect any traffic congestion or parking needs. Additionally, the applicant will be required to meet setback standards when submitting a building permit application. This condition is met. (5) The use shall be served adequately by essential public services, such as streets, police, fire protection and utilities. • The property is adequately served by public services and the proposed accessory structure will not require additional services beyond those that can be provided by existing utilities. This condition is met. (6) The use shall not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and shall not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the city. • The proposed accessory structure should not create any additional requirements at public cost. This condition is met. (7) The use shall preserve and incorporate the site's natural and scenic features into the development design and cause minimal adverse environmental effects. • The property in question is 1.8 acres, and the accessory structure will not impact any natural features on the site and is not anticipated to cause any adverse environmental effects. This condition is met. Specific Conditional Use Permit Criteria for Private Garages and Accessory Buildings Exceeding the Size Requirements. The specific criteria for granting a conditional use permit for an oversized accessory building is listed in Section 25-23(c)(9) of the Zoning Code; staff evaluation of the application follows the citations: (a) The property where the structure is to be located cannot be reduced through subdividing as long as the building remains on the site. • Further subdivision of the property would not be practical due to the presence of wetlands. This condition is met. (b) The building shall not be of a pole building type construction (defined as a structure that utilizes treated lumber buried in the ground that serves as the building foundation). • The applicant has stated that the proposed accessory structure will not be of a pole building type construction. This condition is met. (c) No door or other access opening shall exceed ten (10) feet in height • The applicant will need to submit a building permit to confirm final dimensions of the accessory structure. This condition is met. (d) The structure shall not be used for commercial or industrial activities, except as allowed by the regulations governing home occupations. 20 3  • As stated in the applicant’s narrative, the accessory structure will be used for residential purposes only, including parking and storage. No commercial or industrial activities are proposed to occur in the structure. This condition is met. 60-DAY RULE Application Complete: February 5, 2024 60-Day Review Deadline: April 5, 2024 Planning Commission Meeting: March 7, 2024 Expected City Council Action: March 26, 2024 ROLE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION The role of the Planning Commission is to hold a public hearing and review the Conditional Use Permit request as it relates to the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance requirements and provide a recommendation to the City Council. RECOMMENDATION Staff has determined that this Conditional Use Permit for an additional garage meets the review criteria of the City’s Ordinance. Staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit with conditions listed in the draft resolution. MOTION Motion to recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit for an additional garage at 4030 Granada Avenue North. Attachments: Development Checklist Applicant’s Narrative Applicant’s Site Plan Draft City Council Resolution 21 4  Development Checklist 4030 Granada Avenue North - Conditional Use Permit Project name Henrichs Conditional Use Permit Proposed use Additional Garage Existing site conditions Residential property Site access Existing accesses off Granada Avenue North and 40th Street North Zoning R-2 (Low-Density Housing) Comprehensive Plan guidance Low Density Residential Is a Comprehensive Plan amendment required? No Any Zoning approvals anticipated? None beyond the CUP request Any Subdivision approvals anticipated? No Potential deviations from City Code (if a PUD)? No Any Variances requested? No Any financial incentives from the City being No requested by the developer? Has the developer met with the City’s No, but the application was reviewed by the DRC Development Review Committee? Has the developer submitted a formal Yes application? Any anticipated environmental impacts? None Has the developer met with the Planning The request will be heard as a public hearing item on Commission? March 7, 2024 by the Planning Commission Other jurisdiction approvals required None identified City of Oakdale ● 1584 Hadley Avenue N, Oakdale, MN 55128 www.oakdalemn.gov ● 651-739-5086 22 We would like to build an additional garage for personal/ private use, for parking and storage. The building will be built to meet all codes and limits implemented by the city and will be sided and shingled to match the current buildings on the property. The building dimensions will be 25x40 or slightly smaller depending on materials and terrain needs etc. Thank you! Don Henrichs 23 24  CITY OF OAKDALE RESOLUTION NO. 2024-xx A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AN ADDITIONAL GARAGE AT 4030 GRANADA AVENUE NORTH SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS. At a meeting of the City Council of the City of Oakdale held on Tuesday, March 26, 2024, at Oakdale City Hall, 1584 Hadley Avenue North, Oakdale, Minnesota, with the following members present: Mayor Kevin Zabel; Councilmembers Andy Morcomb, Jake Ingebrigtson, Noah Her, and Susan Willenbring, and the following members absent: None, the Oakdale City Council resolved: WHEREAS, Don Henrichs has requested a Conditional Use Permit for an additional garage, and WHEREAS, the property is zoned R-2 and contains an existing single-family dwelling and detached garage, and in accordance with the City of Oakdale Code of Ordinances, Chapter 25, Article 18, Sec. 25-23(c)(9), a second garage may be allowed via Conditional Use Permit, and WHEREAS, the proposal for an additional garage meets the general and specific criteria for a Conditional Use Permit and complies with the Comprehensive Plan, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the request, and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Oakdale hereby approves the Conditional Use Permit for an additional garage at 4030 Granada Avenue North (Legal Description: Attached as Exhibit A) subject to the following conditions: 1. The garage shall meet setback and height requirements. 2. The garage shall not exceed 1,000 square feet in size. 3. A building permit must be obtained for the use. Voting in Favor: Mayor Kevin Zabel; Councilmembers Andy Morcomb, Jake Ingebrigtson, Noah Her, and Susan Willenbring Voting Against: None Resolution duly seconded and passed this 26th day of March, 2024. _____________________________ Kevin Zabel, Mayor ______________________________ Sara Ludwig, City Clerk 25 Exhibit A – Legal Description That part of the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 7, Township 29, Range 21 described as follows: Beginning at the southeast comer of said Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter; thence west along the south line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter a distance of 165.00 feet; thence north, parallel to the east line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter to the south line of the Northeast Quarter of said Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter; thence cast along said south line to the Southeast corner of said Northeast Quarter of said Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter; thence south along the east line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter to the point of beginning, except the North 195.00 feet of above described property, Washington County, Minnesota. 26