08-01-05 PCITEM 3-1
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC.
4800 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 202, Golden Valley, MN 55422
Telephone: 763.231.2555 Facsimile: 783.231.2581 planners(ainacplanning.com
PLANNING REPORT
TO: Otsego Planning Commission
FROM: Laurie Shives/Daniel Licht
DATE: 26 July 2005
RE: Otsego — Elk River Utilities CUP
FILE NO: 176.02 — 05.22
BACKGROUND
Elk River Municipal Utilities is requesting approval of an amendment to their existing
Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow for an expansion/upgrade to the existing Otsego
electrical substation located near the intersection of Packard Avenue NE and County
Road 39. The electrical substation is owned by Wright Hennepin Electrical Co-op,
however, Elk River Municipal Utilities has a shared substation agreement to utilize the
station. The applicant is requesting the upgrade to their portion of the existing
substation due to increasing growth in Otsego and the resulting demand for higher
electrical capacities. A rezoning of the subject site from R-3, Residential -Long Range
Urban Service District to INS, Institutional District to better accommodate the existing
use and proposed expansion.
Exhibits:
A. Site Location
B. Existing Site Plan
C. Proposed Site Plan
D. Aerial Site Plan
ANALYSIS
Zoning. A rezoning of the subject site from R-3, Residential -Long Range Urban
Service District to INS, Institutional District is being proposed. Section 20-90-6.G of the
Zoning Ordinance provides that public related utility buildings and structures are allowed
within the INS District by conditional use permit. The applicant is proposing an
amendment to their existing CUP in order to expand the substation. In addition to the
specific performance standards applicable to the allowance of a substation expansion,
the Planning Commission must also consider criteria for approval of Zoning Map
Amendments outlined in Section 20-3-2.F and the CUP criteria outlined in Section 20-4-
2.F of the Zoning Ordinance:
The proposed action's consistency with the specific policies and provisions of the
official City Comprehensive Plan.
Comment: As stated in the Comprehensive Plan, the City was formed on the
basis of ensuring that there would be adequate community facilities for its
residents including public utilities, public safety and administration. Expansion of
the substation would support this commitment to the City's residents.
2. The proposed use's compatibility with present and future land uses of the area.
Comment: The existing substation is a compatible use within the abutting R-3
Districts as it is screened from adjoining residential properties and expansion of
the substation is not anticipated to create additional adverse impacts to
surrounding properties and uses.
3. The proposed use's conformity with all performance standards contained in the
Zoning Ordinance (i.e., parking, loading, noise, etc.).
Comment: The design of the substation expansion shall conform to all applicable
Zoning Ordinance and Engineering Manual performance standards.
4. The proposed use's effect upon the area in which it is proposed.
Comment: The proposed expansion to the existing substation is not anticipated
to have any negative effect upon the area in which it is located.
5. The proposed use's impact upon property values of the area in which it is
proposed.
Comment: Although no study has been completed, the proposed expansion is
not anticipated to negatively impact area property values.
6. Traffic generation by the proposed use in relation to the capabilities of streets
serving the property.
Comment: The proposed substation expansion is not anticipated to generate any
additional traffic impacting 89th Street NE or County Road 39.
2
7. The proposed use's impact upon existing public services and facilities including
parks, schools, streets, and utilities and its potential to overburden the City=s
service capacity.
Comment: The proposed expansion is of an existing City utility and thus is
anticipated to have a positive impact to the City=s ability to service its residents.
Lot Area and Setbacks. The minimum lot area for the INS District is five acres unless
otherwise specified or reduced by conditional use permit. Additionally, according to
Section 20-32-5 of the Zoning Ordinance pertaining to essential services, lots used
specifically for essential may be less than the specified dimensions for the district
provided that a series of stipulations are met, particularly that applicable district
setbacks are complied with.
The subject site is approximately 1.4 acres and required district setbacks for the front
yard are 30 feet from right-of-way lines, 50 feet for the side yard and 50 feet for the rear
yard. The revised plans indicate that the proposed expansion structure will be located
between the existing two structures on the site. In this location the proposed structure
meets the front yard and side setbacks, but does not comply with rear yard setback
requirements. The expansion structure is proposed to be located approximately 35 feet
from the rear property line, while a 50 -foot setback is required.
Although existing structures on the site do not meet required setbacks, they are
considered legally non -conforming as they were compliant with existing setbacks when
they were constructed. Any expansions or alterations to the site must meet current
setbacks. The proposed location of the expansion structure must be revised to meet all
current setbacks prior to approval of the conditional use permit amendment or the
applicant must seek approval of a variance to allow the expansion structure to be
constructed in its proposed location.
The submitted plans show the existing 33 -foot right-of-way along County Road 39, as
well as the future right-of-way of 75 feet upon expansion of County Road 39. The
applicant must dedicate the additional 42 feet of right-of-way upon approval of the CUP.
Height. As stated in Section 20-17-3.13 of the Zoning Ordinance, building height limits
do not apply to poles, towers and other structures which are essential services, such as
electrical utility structures.
Landscaping. Section 20-63-5.A.1 of the Zoning Ordinance requires that public related
utility buildings and structures, such as the subject site, be screened and landscaped
when within and abutting a residential property. The site is currently surrounded by a
fairly significant vegetative buffer which provides screening of the site from the single
family homes to the south and west. Additional landscaping to the east of the site may
be necessary to properly screen from abutting residential properties. There is an
existing 8 -foot, semi -transparent fence, which the applicant is proposing to expand to
accommodate and screen the substation expansion.
RECOMMENDATION
The applicant has submitted necessary information and has made a good case for the
need to expand the existing substation to support existing and planned development in
the City. Thus, we recommend approval of the rezoning to INS District and CUP
amendment application as outlined below.
POSSIBLE ACTIONS
Decision 1 — Rezoning to INS, Institutional District
A. Motion to approve a rezoning of the subject site from R-3, Residential -Long
Range Urban Service District to INS, Institutional District based on a finding that
the proposed use is an allowed use by Conditional Use Permit in the INS District.
B. Motion to deny the application based on a finding that the request is inconsistent
with the Comprehensive Plan.
C. Motion to table.
Decision 2 — CUP Amendment
A. Motion to approve a CUP allowing a electrical substation expansion at the
intersection of Packard Avenue NE and County Road 39, subject to the following
conditions:
Proposed plans must be revised to show the expansion structure's
compliance with all applicable setbacks.
2. Power lines running from the substation east through to the Mississippi
Shores 6th 7th and 8th Additions must be placed underground within twelve
months of recording of the CUP.
3. Applicant must submit a landscape plan depicting adequate screening of the
site from adjacent residential properties, subject to City staff approval.
4. Comments of other City staff.
B. Motion to deny the application based on a finding that the request is inconsistent
with the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance.
C. Mike Robertson Judy Hudson
Ron Wagner Andy MacArthur
Bryan Adams
C!
J V.J 1 G MIIC�
1 inch equals 1 mile
0
DAD
0
1
W
Hakanson �
Anderson 3601 Thurston Avenue, Anoka, MN 55303 ��
1 ASSOC., Inc. Phone: 763/427-5860 Fax: 763/427-0520
MEMORANDUM
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
cc: Mike Robertson, Administrator
Judy Hudson, Clerk
Dan Licht, NAC
Andy MacArthur, City Attorney
Gary Ostrom, Great River Energy
Bryan Adams, Elk River Municipal Utilities
From: Ronald J. Wagner, PE
Date: July 27, 2005
Re: Elk River Utilities — Substation Expansion, Parcel # 118-500-153301
We have reviewed the Preliminary plans, dated 10/1/04, for the above -referenced project
and would offer the following comments:
Plot Plan (with proposed buildings shown)
Plan sheets shall depict the finished floor elevations of each building or structure.
The grading plan shows various spot elevations, however, there are no
concrete slab elevations given for the proposed structures.
Other Recommendations
Please submit a grading plan and landscape plan for review. The substation
expansion is going to add structures that may be unappealing to the adjacent
residential properties. Please submit a landscape plan showing what
measures will be taken to screen the view of the additional structures.
2. A drainage and utility easement must be provided along each boundary line for
the property.
As part of the approval, it is requested that any electrical line between the
substation and Mississippi Shores 6th, 7th and 8h Additions (including Mississippi
Shores 6th, 7th and 8th Additions) be placed underground within a certain time
frame. We suggest 1 year, or 18 months from CUP approval.
Resubmittal is required for approval.
G:\Municipal\Aotsego22xx\2500\ot2500erussrvw2.doc