Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPCAgenda_92Jun22PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA June 22, 1992 7:30 p.m. A. CALL TO ORDER i B. ROLL CALL: Lee Barry Len Boche Ed Finegan Marie Furton Steve Huso Carolyn Nestingen Ken Salzberg C. APPROVAL OF MINUTES D. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES E. REPORTS, REQUESTS, RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Public Hearing on the subdivision and final plat for lots 3, 4, 5, and 6 of the Stratford Office Park to Block 1 lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and Outlot A of Maple Knolls 2. Request for a variance in the maximum fence height in §9- 2.06[4] of the zoning code for 1700 St. Mary's in an R-1 zone 3. Staff discussion of AMOCO plans for northwest corner of Snelling & Larpenteur 4. Schedule special meeting on July 8, 1992 at 6 p.m. 5. For your information article ~' . ADJOURN • MINUTES REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 18, 1992 7:30 p.m. PRESENT: ABSENT: Lee Barry Marie Furton Len Boche Carolyn Nestingen Ed Finegan Steve Huso Ken Salzberg ALSO PRESENT• Susan Hoyt, Administrator acting as Planner Paul Cernia, Council- member Tim Malloy, Planner DSU Bill Westerberg, Engineer Meeting was called to order at 7:30 by Lee Barry, Chair. The minutes of the April 27, 1992 meeting were unanimously approved as written. REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE IN ~9-2 04j11(c) OF THE ZONING CODE FOR 1391 WEST IDAHO. Property owner, Lee Barry, asked the commission to approve his request for a variance of two feet in the required five foot west sideyard setback of five feet to construct a new double garage in place of an existing single car garage. The variance is needed to protect a flowering crab tree in the rear yard and to maintain an open view from the rear windows of the dwelling. Being a commission member, he then excused himself from further discussion and voting. After some discussion, Finegan moved to approve the variance as long as it met the conditions for granting a variance and did not interfere with the visibility from the neighbor's house. The motion carried unanimously. REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE IN ~9-4.01[41(c) OF THE ZONING CODE FOR 2097 WEST FOLWELL Barbara Shiels and Frank Preese are planning to build a new home on the vacant lot for 2097 Folwell Avenue. Ms. Shiels presented their request for a variance in the east sideyard requirement of 1 1/2 feet from the required 5 feet in order to save an existing 20" caliper elm tree on the property. The location of the structure on the trapezoidal lot makes a variance necessary for a small portion of the deck area on the rear of the structure. After discussion by the commission, Barry moved to grant the variance on the condition that the variance be allowed only for the rear 5 feet of the structure and that the remaining portion of the structure must meet the setbacks in the zoning code. Salzberg seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. Page 2 Minutes 5/18/92 REVIEW OF PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR ROTTLUND HOMES DEVELOPMENT Representatives from Rottlund Homes presented plan revisions recommended by the commission, planner and engineer at the April 27 commission meeting. The private drive will be named Maple Court to remove any confusion with Maple Knoll Drive. The orientation of buildings has been adjusted to create a more unified appearance and eliminates those areas where buildings and patios were close to the roadway. Although the width of the outlot (29 feet) does not meet the minimum standards for a public street as required by the ordinance, it does provide ample area to develop and maintain the roadway and sanitary sewer & water lines that run adjacent to it. (CONTINUATION OF THIS .DISCUSSION WAS DEFERRED TO ALLOW THE CONDUCTING OF TWO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARINGS) PUBLIC HEARING ON AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR LOTS 3 4 5 & 6 OF THE STRATFORD OFFICE PARK SUBDIVISION PUBLIC HEARING ON A ZONING AMENDMENT FROM B-1 LIMITED BUSINESS TO R-4 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL FOR LOTS 3 4 5 & 6 OF THE STRATFORD OFFICE PARK SUBDIVISION Public Hearings were opened at 8:10. It was determined to conduct the public hearing on a zoning amendment in conjunction with the public hearing on an amendment to the comprehensive plan but to vote on each one separately. Tim Malloy, Planner with Dahlgren, Shardlow & Uban, explained an amendment to the comprehensive plan was necessary because the comprehensive plan presently calls for lots 3, 4, 5, and 6 of the Stratford Office Park subdivision be zoned for limited business use. It is appropriate to change the zoning to medium density residential use to accommodate the development of townhome units by Rottlund. Mr. Malloy also explained that in order and land use consistant it is necessary from B-1, limited business use, to R-4, on lots 3, 4, 5, and 6 of the Stratford Donald Jensen, representative of Rottlu • homes to built and answered questions. closed at 8:20 p.m. to keep the zoning code to amend the zoning code residential development Office Park subdivision. nd Homes, described the The public hearings were Page 3 Minutes 5/18/92 Huso moved to approve the change in the comprehensive land use plan from a limited business to medium density residential. Seconded by Finegan and approved with Salzberg abstaining. Huso then moved to approve the zoning amendment from B-1 limited business to R-4 medium density residential for lots 3,4,5 & 6 of the Stratford office park subdivision. Seconded by Salzberg and unanimously approved. Finegan moved to amend the PUD final development plan to include mixed use development in accordance with the plans submitted by the applicant so that these plans will become an addendum to the planned development. Seconded by Salzberg and unanimously approved. DISCUSSION ON REVIEW OF PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR ROTTLUND HOMES RESUMED It was noted that this discussion is a review of a preliminary PUD not a plat as indicated on the agenda. The drainage is primarily surface sheet drained to catch basins • along the access drives via curb and gutter. All storm water will ultimately flow to the detention basin on the northend of the development for holding and discharge downstream. Existing watermains and storm sewer lines will be modified at the south end of the site. Additional overstory (large) trees have been added on the north end of the site in order to screen the development from the residential area to the north. Finegan moved to approve the PUD as presented with the conditions that 1) all additional landscaping refinements are to be worked out with staff and, 2) engineering will review drainage plans and calculations that they meet requirements. Seconded by Salzberg and passed unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING ON A REQUEST FOR RESIDENTIAL PERMIT PARKING IN THE UNIVERSITY GROVE NEIGHBORHOOD The public hearing opened at 9:10 p,m. Jeanne Lupton, president of the University Grove Homeowners Association, spoke on behalf of the residents. They are requesting that residential permit parking be adopted so residents purchasing permits can leave a personal car on the • street for more than two hours between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. Monday through Friday without being ticketed by the police. Due to the proximity to the U of M, the Grove has heavy non-residential Page 4 Minutes 5/18/92 traffic from staff and students. Presently there is a two hour maximum parking limit from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. Monday through Friday. The streets that have no parking restrictions are filled up early in the a.m. Slightly more than 75% of the homeowners have signed a petition for permit parking. These petitioners request that: 1. Continue restrictions for non-residents as currently posted. 2. Add "Except by Permit" or similar language to existing signs that restrict parking during daytime hours. 3. Allow residents, if they choose, to purchase parking permits from the City of Falcon Heights so their vehicles may be parked on Grove streets during restricted hours. 4. Continue to grant temporary parking permits to residents for non-resident visitors on an occasional basis. They would like uniform parking throughout the neighborhood by posting both sides of Folwell; the north side of Hoyt, west of • Coffman; the east side of Fulham and both sides of Vincent, Northrop and Burton streets. The permits would be issued only to cars registered to their homes on streets with permit parking. Staff recommended that all streets requested for permit parking be approved for permit parking and that "no parking" weekdays 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. remain on Hoyt east of Coffman because of bus traffic on Hoyt and Coffman. Permit fees would be purchased from city hall by providing the license number of each vehicle that would have a permit. This number will be checked for registration to that address. The permit fee would be $10 for the first two permits, $20 for each permit over two and a $5.00 fee for a lost permit. The public hearing closed at 9:35 p.m. Salzberg moved to approve residential permit parking on designated streets. Seconded by Huso and unanimously approved. REVISIONS OF PARKING REQUIREMENTS IN THE UNIVERSITY GROVE NEIGHBORHOOD • The University Grove Homeowners Association submitted a number of recommendations for Grove parking restriction changes (see attached). Page 5 Minutes 5/18/92 Staff made the following recommendations that reflect this request and additional considerations: 1. Change the two-hour parking on Folwell east of Coffman from two hour parking to one hour parking due to the substantial increase in non-resident parking on this portion of Folwell after the signs were changed to two hour parking almost two years ago. 2. Change all day parking to one hour parking on Hoyt east of Folwell adjacent to tennis courts to coordinate with the tennis court user's time limit and eliminate all day parking. 3. Make signs as simple and consistent as possible which requires: - replacing all two hour parking signs with signs that read "TWO HOUR PARKING WEEKDAYS 8 .M. TO 4 P.M.or by permit" because currently the north-south residential streets do not limit the two hour parking to weekdays. It is unnecessary and inconvenient for residents and • confusing for the policy to have these restrictions apply to weekends. 4. Enforce parking regulations regarding proximity to crosswalks, intersections and fire hydrants. If chronic abuse occurs, sign these areas. - Hoyt and Northrop - Fulham as it turns into Folwell - others as appropriate 5. Minimize the number of signs throughout the neighborhood. 6. Have the city engineer evaluate solutions to the through traffic from Como to Larpenteur After discussion by the commission, Barry moved to adopt the planner's six recommendations, seconded by Salzberg and the motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 9:45 i Susan Hoyt, A minis ator • Dee Swenson, Recording Secretary -t - ~ . ~' ' University Grove Homeowners Association RECOMMENDED PARKING RESTRICTION CHANGES March 1992 West Ho~-t at Cleveland Limit parking on the northeast end of West Hoyt near the University tennis courts to 2 hours (or less) with no parking allowed within 10-15 feet of Cleveland Avenue. This would: provide short-term parking for non-residents consistent with the intent of parking restrictions elsewhere in the neighborhood; make these spaces more available to people using the tennis courts; and prevent the obstructed view that currently creates a hazard for those driving from Hoyt onto Cleveland Avenues. _Fulham. Vincent & Northrop Streets Change the signs on Fulham, Vincent, and Northrop Streets to limit parking between 8:00 AM and 4:00 PM on weekdays only (i.e, add "Monday through Friday"). The residents on these streets do not feel that weekend restrictions are necessary, and the sign change would make the parking restrictions on these streets uniform with those on the adjoining sections of Hoyt and Folwell Avenues, making enforcement easier. Folwell Avenue East of Coffman Limit parking on Folwell Avenue east of Coffman to 1 hour between 8:00 AM and 4:00 PM, Monday - Friday. Parking on this section of Folwell was limited to 1 hour until the signs were changed in 1990 or 1991. Since the change, daytime student parking and the resulting street congestion have increased significantly. Returning to the 1-hour limit would noticeably ease the congestion. General Safety Prohibit parking within 10 feet or so of intersections, curves or school bus stops~f permitting parking in these areas would obstruct visibility or vehicular clearance. This is a general request for the City engineer(s) to evaluate the safety of on- street parking in terms of the Grove's street layout and terrain, and to prohibit parking where it creates a hazardous condition for drivers or pedestrians. Residents cited the following as particular points of concern because they are on what have become the "commuter routes" through the Grove from Larpenteur Avenue to St. Anthony Park: o The northwest corner of the Coffman & Folwell intersection o The curves on Northrop where it joins Folwell o Northrop where it joins Hoyt o The curve on Folwell where it joins Fulham o The corner where o t& u a intersect Other potential hazard areas cited are: o The curves on Vincent where it joins Folwell • o The curve at the east end of Folwell o School bus stops in the neighborhood MINUTES REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MAY 27, 1992 Acting Mayor Ciernia convened the meeting at 7:00 p.m. PRESENT Ciernia, Gehrz, Gibson Talbot and Jacobs. Also present were Chenoweth and Hoyt. ABSENT Baldwin tarrived later) . MINUTES OF 5/13/92 APPROVED Council approved the Minutes of May 13. 1992 by unanimous consent. CITY TO SERVE AS COLLECTION AGENCY FOR GIBES SCHOOLHOUSE AGENCY FUNDS Ciernia explained that the community group raising funds for restoration of the Gibbs Schoolhouse has requested the city act as the collection agency for the funds. Art Lindig representing the group, informed Council that the checks will be made out to the Gibbs School Restoration Fund and will open a checking account. The city would serve as the collection site for donations to the fund. Jacobs moved that the city serve in this capacity as requested which carried unanimously. Mr. Lindig then requested the city consider a donation to the project. Staff will research the city's options for making charitable contributions and will meet with the group to discuss any possible options. CONSENT AGENDA APPROVED Council approved the following Consent Agenda by unanimous consent: 1. Disbursements a) General Disbursements through 5/20/92, $95,311.39 b) Payroll, 5/1/92'5/15/92, $10, 695.14 2. License #9063, Combustion Heating & Power, Inc. 3. Authorization for Staff to Request Proposals for a Replacement Public Works Tractor 4. Acceptance of $100.00 Contribution for Recreation Scholarship Program 5. Approval of Request from L. Barry, 1391 W. Idaho, for a 2 ft. Sideyard Variance for Construction of a Double Garage 6. Approval of Request from Shiels/Preese, 2097 Folwell w: MINUTES MAY 27, 1992 PAGE 2 for a 1 1/2 ft. Variance for Construction of a Single Family Residence 7. Approval of Request from Corpus Christi Parrish for Permission to use Tatum Street as One Leg of a Procession on 5 /21/9 2 PUBLIC HEARING ON ZONING AMENDMENT FROM B-1 TO R-4 FOR LOTS 3, 4, 5 AND 6 OF STRATFORD OFFICE PARK SUBDIVISION Ciernia opened the public hearing at 7:20 p.m. and explained that the zoning amendment has been requested to allow the construction of 24 townhomes on property presently zoned B-1, limited business. He also explained that the request had been heard and approved by the Planning Commission on May 18, 1992. Don Jensen, Rottlund Homes, presented and explained the site plan, configuration of buildings, floorplans, etc. for the townhome development proposed for lots 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the Stratford Office Park Addition. There being no one in attendance wishing to be heard Ciernia closed the hearing at 7:45 p.m. Gehrz then moved adoption of Ordinance 0-92-1 which carried unanimously. ORDINANCE 0-92-1 ' AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING OF LOTS 3, 4, 5 AND 6 OF THE STRATFORD OFFICE PARK ADDITION FROM B-1 TO R-4 APPROVAL OF PROPOSED RESOLUTION APPROVING PRELIMINARY PUD FOR ROTTLUND DEVELOPMENT Council briefly reviewed the preliminary land use development for the Rottlund Homes townhouse development, The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the matter on May 18, 1992 and recommended approval. Gibson Talbot moved adoption of Resolution R-92-18 which carried unanimously. RESOLUTION R-92-18 A RESOLUTION APPROVING PRELIMINARY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT BY ROTTLUND HOMES PROPOSED RESOLUTION REVISING THE EXISTING COMMERCIAL PUD FOR ROTTLUND DEVELOPMENT . At the May 18, 1992 Planning Commission meeting that body recommended approval of the revision which is necessary to accommodate the townhome development proposed by Rottlund Homes. Jacobs moved adoption of Resolution R-92-19 which carried unanimously. MINUTES MAY 27, 1992 PAGE 3 RESOLUTION R-82-19 A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE EXISTING COMMERCIAL PUD FOR LOTS 3, 4, 5 AND 6 OF THE STRATFORD OFFICE PARK ADDITION TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL PUD 1991 CITY FINANCIAL REPORT PRESENTED AND APPROVED David Hennenkamp, representing the city's auditing firm, Kern, DeWenter, Viere Ltd., made a brief presentation of the audit report and indicated the city is in sound financial condition. Giernia moved acceptance and approval of the report which carried unanimously. BALDWIN ARRIVES Baldwin arrived at 8:10 p.m. ADDENDUM TO POLICY AGENDA Council agreed to the addition of Item P-9, Park Hours, to the agenda. RESIDENTIAL PERMIT PARKING APPROVED FOR UNIVERSITY GROVE AREA Hoyt explained that the process for considering residential parking in the University Grove area had followed the guidelines set .forth in the City's parking policy. She also explained that granting this request would allow residents who purchase a permit for a vehicle to park beyond the normal parking restrictions. A public hearing on the request was held by the Planning Commission on May 18, 1992 and the commission recommended approval. Following a brief discussion Jacobs moved adoption of Resolution R-92-20 which carried unanimously. RESOLUTION R-92-20 A RESOLUTION APPROVING RESIDENTIAL PERMIT PARKING ON CERTAIN DESIGNATED STREETS IN THE CITY'S UNIVERSITY GROVE NEIGHBORHOOD REVISIONS OF PARKING REQUIREMENTS IN THE UNIVERSITY GROVE NEIGHBORHOOD Council reviewed a request from the University Grove Homeowner's Association to revise parking regulations in the neighborhood to improve parking control and consistency throughout the neighborhood. These proposed revisions had been discussed in a meeting attended by Grove representatives, police and city staff, and mutually agreed upon. The Planning Commission also reviewed the proposed changes and recommended approval. After the • MINUTES MAY 27, 1992 PAGE 4 discussion Ciernia moved approval of the the parking regulations as recommended. Motion carried unanimously. CLOSING TIME FOR CITY PARKS AMENDED Gehrz speaking on behalf of the Parks and Recreation Committee, explained that the commission is recommending changing the park closing time from 11:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. This decision was based on the fact that most park vandalism occurs after 10:00 p.m., much of the acitivity in the parks after 10 p.m. tends to be of the nuisance variety, out of consideration for residents living near the parks and the fact that the Roseville police recommends a 20:00 p.m. closing time to be consistent with their city's park hours. Gehrz moved adoption of Ordinance 0-92-2 which carried unanimously. ORDINANCE 0-92-2 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 3-4.01, SUBD. 2(A) OF • THE CITY CODE RELATING TO PARK HOURS PRESENTATIONS BY SENATOR MARTY AND REPRESENTATIVE MCGUTRE Senator John Marty and Representative Mary Jo McGuire presented an update on legislative action during the past session and responded to questions from Council. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:25 p.m. Tom Baldwin, Mayor ATTEST; Shirley Chenoweth, City Clerk . Meeting Date: 6/22/92 Agenda Item: E 1 ITEM: Public Hearing on the subdivision and final plat for lots 3, 4, 5, and 6 of the Stratford Office Park to Block 1 lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and outlot A of Maple Knolls SUBMITTED BY: Donald Jensen, Rottlund Homes REVIEWED BY: Susan Hoyt, City Administrator Tim Malloy, Consulting Planner Bill Westerberg, City Engineer EXPLANATION/SUMMARY: Rottlund Homes is requesting the city to replat lots 3, 4, 5, and 6 of the Stratford Office Park to better accommodate title in the condominium (townhome) development. The new plat will be Block 1 lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and outlot A of Maple Knolls. The replatting will put all publicly owned and maintained utilities in an "outlot" which is basically the right of way. ATTACHMENTS: • A. Diagram of proposed plat B. Planner's report, dated June 19, 1992 ACTION REQUESTED: 1. Hold public hearing 2. Approve the proposed plat for lots 3, 4, 5, and 6 of the • Stratford Office Park ~- • • • ~, • FRO1Vl: ~ . Tim. Malloy - - ~ _ _.• - _ .. _ R~:. . ~ R~ttlund-Pro-ect Iandsc and Gradin Plan Revisions and FinaI Piat Drawing. - _ CONSkJLTING ?Li-,y~TNERS .. ~ - - - .:. . - LANE?SC_11PE • s~~CELzTECTS.- . . _ . ~ .. . - .: .. _ .. .._ . 300, r~ST 45LE:~,-CT_E tiQRTH _ .. _ .,.. -- SU-~ 210 _ _ .. .. .. _ _ - _ . - . . -- '.~.4IN-ti,-EAFQLIS, ;1R!ti ~$=01 ._ .. . MEMURAI-tDLFM ...:.- -- - . - _:.. _ . .. •-I?A`I~:-, 22~June I992 ~ - .. •---.. . Susan Ho and Memiiers of thePl ... M Comm` . TD`.. - yt a sssiori --- Dne.ofthe items of business reiared w the M Ie Knolls m ect, as ou _ ....,. _ _~ p P 3 ~y received-,gym. Susan Hoyt, is the:consideratloa ofthe relim~n and tlmed in a June I6tIr Ietr~r. we . final,piat ~quirements. The comments in this'memo relate-tn-some of the deral~ that were Ieft for staff_review_at t~~.e_last raeetin;- The current package ofdrawings submitted by the Applicant meet the regmrements fori?reliminary - Piat as outlmecl ~ the Faieon Heigfits Subdivision Oniinarece_ Since our last i~evtew The, Applicant has made cl3anges in•the wading, and iazcdscape glans for the project, and has, included a-topvgrapbic . survey bf the property_ . .: - - - - - . . _._ -....-. . .. - - -.:. Landscape and Grading Plan ltevisfvns .. The changes to the Landscape Sian .were made in accordancc:withour cotments as CtiSCUssed at flee :_ - •.- grevious PianrmlgCammzssi~ meeting. Ad~itipkantings have'been.provided lietween the exist~g office bur']d~ings.and. the residential.sEiuctare do lotone on the sabject lxoperty. The current ~= -plan should provide reasonab3.e~SCreenibg iri~Iiis area.. __ - ~ ... . The changes-to the grading plans include reu;ovaig the retainibg walls beiween the office buz~ding and the:proposed emits oa Tots four. and •fieve.-.Appalentiy,~the~Applicantlras detemined that ti3e existing _ . pond inthis•acea was •iz~tended for a~sthetiC~poses only andisnot needed ~vrtarm water retention This issue wiIl be discussed in_greatcr detail .by. the ~Y $ engmeeririg conSUiEarat: If capacity is noun issue then the retaining walls are not ner~essary: The_•curnent plan submitted by the Applicant, shows -- -• - the walls rempved' an8 replaced by 3 ta.1•slopes. W~beIieve this is a betteer~soItition: However, the- ....... pla€r cauid be' improved ~the~frrial gran-mgwere done with more ~adiiia~.a~d-~•~iral~.ciolo~g cx~tours-- - - .. .:_ ` . Final.Plat - - _.. ~ - The Plan Drawing provided. by the A~iplic~.t is adequate wig the following exceptions and comments: -- - - I:. The serve ors and-en _ . _..._. _. :... .: - . _. _ . _ .. .. y - - - gmeers registration infoma ativn bas not yet been. added ~to-~€he .. .-. - .. .. draw~g. -Zhis.is-afam~ali[y that iS nannal>.y done justptiorto filing the drawing, - _. after aII changes aIId revisions have been made_ _ -- .. -- • 06/22/92 12:07 DSU, INC. Rattlund domes Project ?~2 June X9~ Page Z 2. The plan indicates mOr~ents that have ]peen found.. This information is esaneoUs since, according to the surveyor on the grajecx, monuments have not yet been set. Monrmments are nannally set after the final layout of the site is approved and prigr to filing the plat. with the County. 3. mot A has be~a. reduced in widtfi fcam ~0 feet On tree previous drawing to 4~S feet. The City standard is 60 feet. The innermost utility line (sanitary sewer), as shown an the Site Plan, is 35 feet east of tltie western property Iiz,e, The proposed width of OutIot A leaves 9S feet for wotidng on these utilities. Yf these lines are not set too deep this should be adequate. • r~ ooa Meeting Date: 6/22/92 Agenda Item E-2 • ITEM: Request for a variance in the maximum fence height in section 9-2.06[4] of the zoning code for 1700 St. Mary's in an R-1 zone SUBMITTED BY: Ms. McNulty and Mr. Steklenski, property owners REVIEWED BY: Susan Hoyt, City Administrator acting as planner EXPLANATION/DESCRIPTION: Ms. McNulty and Mr.Steklenski are requesting a variance in the maximum height of the fence which is six feet in a side yard or rear yard and three feet in the front yard. A variance of two feet is necessary to construct an eight foot high fence in the side yard and rear yard, and a variance of five feet is necessary to construct an eight foot high fence along the side of the front yard (see Diagram A). The request is being made to fully screen the residential property from the adjacent commercial parking lot and alley. The zoning code limits the height of fences to keep front yards open and to maintain consistency in side and rear yards. This is typically a reasonable regulation to maintain throughout the city. However, the residential property at 1700 St. Mary's • directly abuts a commercial parking lot and alley that is used for loading and refuse disposal (see C). Therefore, an adequate screen or buffer between the residential zone and the adjacent commercial use is desirable and actually required in the zoning code. The request for an eight foot fence may be considered reasonable because it will be a more substantial screen for the residents if they build and sit on a raised deck or stand in their backyard. ATTACHMENTS: A. Diagram of planned location of fence B. Diagram of type and size of fence C. Photo of location and current fence RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends granting the variance of five feet in maximum fence height in the south front yard and two feet in maximum fence height in the south side and rear yard for 1700 St. Mary's street because it meets the conditions for granting a variance, primarily condition: 15.03(c). The granting of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights. ACTION REQUESTED: • 1. Review and approve a request for a variance Section 9- 2.06[4] at 1700 St. Mary's. r1 L.J Request for Variance 1700 St. Marys -Lot 15 The Crossroads Owners: Phil Steklenski and Marianne McNulty Reason for requested variance: We request a variance to Section 9-2.06 Fences of Falcon Heights' Planning and Development regulations. We request an increase in the allowable fence height from six (6) feet to eight (8) feet. We would like the eight foot fence to reduce the excessive noise generated by delivery trucks and employees of Warner's Stellian and Ciatti's in the private alley that borders the east and south borders of our property (see attached lot drawing). The proposed fence will be constructed of Western red cedar and have an identical appearance on both sides (see attached fence drawing). We believe that a wooden fence eight feet tall will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare of residents of Falcon Heights and that this variance will not in any way adversely affect the purpose and the intent of the city's comprehensive guide plan or zoning code. Shopping Center ' Private AIIey ~- • uard rail hainlink ;e Ciatti's {~vrasti l 8 feet J ~~ St. Marys Ave. L . i• I• ~- ~ _ I• e 1 - L-a ~- tom. ~3 Subdivision ~. Standards for Granting of Variance. No variance shall • be granted unless the City Council shall make without qualification on the basis of evidence presented at-the meeting the following findings: a. That the granting of the variance will sot be detrimental to the 'public welfare; b. That the granting of the variance will not substantially diminish or impair property values or improvements in the area; c. That the granting of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights; d. That the variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to ad~aeent property; e. That the variance will not impair the orderly use of the public streets; f. That the variance will not increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety; '''C3' .~~g. ~+Thether the shape, topographical condition or other similar characteristic of the tract is such as to distinguish it . m1ibstantially from all of the other properties in the zoning district of which it is a part, or whether a particular hardship, as . distinguished from mere inconvenience to the owner, would result if the strict letter of the Chapter were carried out; kh. Nhether the variance is sought principally to increase financial gain to the owner of the property, and to determine whether a substantial hardship to the owner would result from a denial of the variance; i. iihether the conditions which give rise to the application for the variance arose after the adoption of this Chapter of the Code of the City of Falcon Heights or any amendment thereto which placed the tract in a zoning district differeat from what it was under the Chapter. In the consideration of this item, the City shall make diligent inquiry as to all changes in the property and shall refuse to grant the variance if the problem is one that can be solved through a proper applioation of a conditional use permit or an amendment of the Zoning code. Financial hardship shall not be a basis for the granting of a variance when the owner purchased the property in reliance on a promise that a variance would be granted, and the City shall dismiss the appeal if it shall appear that the property was purchased on such reliance. Subdivision 5. Conditions. The City may attach such conditions to the grant of the variance as it shall determine will be necessary or desirable to bring it within the purpose and intent of the Chapter. A • public record shall be maintained of such conditions. 18 Planning May 1992 • Park and Shop: Some Guidelines P L A N N I N G P R By Ruth Eckdish Knack Design standards for strip malls in suburbs and cities. To their critics, strip shop- ping centers are the quin- tessential symbol of suburban sprawl, to be eliminated wher- everpossible. Yet to many car- dependent residents of metro- politanareas, the small centers are the closest thing in modern life to the old-fashioned corner store, the place to stop for a quart of milk-or to pick up a videotape for an evening's entertainment. For residents of the Cleve- ~nd Park neighborhood in ashington, D.C., however, the Park and Shop center on Connecticut Avenue was more-a remnant of the early auto age that deserved to be declared a historic landmark. The residents pressured the city to turn down a developer's re- quest to build a higher density complex on the L-shaped site, which is adjacent to a Metro subway station. The 62-year- oldmall has now been restored by developers Douglas Jemal and Paul Millstein and its eight storefronts almost all leased. Nevertheless, there's no doubt that strip centers cause problems. APA senior researcher Marva Morris reports an in- creasing number of inquiries to the Planning Advisory Ser- vice from public agency plan- ners seeking appropriate ways to improve access, circulation, signage, lighting, and-particu- larly-landscaping. "The two or four curb cuts needed to accommodate the malls offer unlimited potential for acci- dents," she notes. But Franklin Raeon, AICP, a consultant with the firm of A C T McGill Smith Punshon in Cin- cinnati,warns that regulations can backfire if those who write them don't understand the par- ticular needs of shopping cen- terdevelopers. "Unreasonable requirements may doom a mall to failure," he says. The result could be an empty shopping center-a community eyesore- and aloss of taxes. Parking lot landscaping is a particular bone of contention. Planners are al- ways asking for more trees, he notes, but retailers are con- cerned about blocking store windows. Raeon's firm has de- veloped alist of some 50 vari- ables that affect a shopping center's viability. Topping the list are visibility and access. Raeon argues for gentle per- suasion-the carrot not the stick. That's the approach the Chi- cago suburb of Skokie used for mall-lined Dempster Street. The results have been good. In 1985 the village committed $2.5 million for a variety of im- provements-including a fa- cade-rebate program for mer- chants-along a six-block d Y a v 9 a a 0 a y 9 R I C E portion of the street. At the same time, a new sign ordi- nancewas adopted. But rather than imposing design guide- lines, says Skokie planning su- pervisorPeter Peyer, AICP, the village simply hired an archi- tect to show what could be done. The architect did pre- liminarydrawings for two strip centers, and that, says Peyer, "set the tone for future im- provements." For years, says Michael Beyard, a planner with the Ur- ban Land Institute in Wash- ington, D.C., the number of strip centers has been grow- ing. "But from what we hear from our numbers, the trend has peaked," he says, especially in southern California, where there has been strong opposi- tion. "And in parts of Texas and Arizona, we see lots of vacancies in strip malls." Beyard has spotted a new trend, the "theming" of strip malls to focus on a particular type of product (housewares, for instance) or service (auto care, office, medical, or even Housing above the stores: a strip mall innovation along El Cajon Boulevard in San Diego. Rob Quigley was the architect. Right: architectural guidelines for the Plaza and North Cedros districts of Solana Beach. 19 p L A N N I N G P R A legal). On the whole, says Beyard, "good developers oY all kinds are becoming much less adverse to regulation than they used to be. They know that areas that are well regu- lated tend to limit the num- bers of particular types of de- velopments, thus limiting the competition in their favor." And what should we call this animal? Both the ULI and the New York-based Interna- tional Council of Shopping Cen- ters use the term strip mall to refer to any unenclosed shop- pingcenter where retailers face a parking lot. Mini-mall, the term used in Los Angeles and some other places,•sounds too much like an enclosed mall, Beyard says. According to the 1990 edition of the ULI's Dol- lars and Cents of Shopping Cen- ters, there are two types • of strip malls: neighborhood cen- ters (30,000 to 100,000 square feet) and community centers pup to 450,000 square feet). Plano's corners One of the few places with C T I specific guidelines for strip malls is Plano, Texas, near Dallas. But, according to chief plan- ner Phyllis Jarrell, AICP, al- most all of Plano's malls are corner shopping centers. Many of them are outparcels, located at the edge of the parking lots of large shopping centers, and the proliferation of pads (de- fined as buildings of less than 5,000 square feet) had concerned the city council, Jarrell says. The design guidelines for re- tail corner development were prepared in 1985 with the help of consultant Johnson, John- son & Roy's Dallas office, and adopted as part of the city's comprehensive plan. "I think they've been fairly successful," says Jarrell. "They state ex- actlywhat our expectations are." Although the guidelines are strictly advisory, they have in- fluenced appearance. Devel- opers of outparcels are now much more conscious of mak- ing them fit in with the large shopping center, she says. Simi- lar guidelines for service sta- tionswere adopted in 1988. C E The 10 guidelines cover: site appropriateness, building ar- rangement, access, circulation andparking, building elements, service facilities, utility/me- chanical equipment, outdoor storage, buffers and screens, landscape, signage, and light- ing. The document includes the recommendation that "con- tinuous linear strip centers should be discouraged because of their disruption to traffic." Bozeman's entryways "It's difficult to chunk off strip malls from general strip com- mercial,"says consultant Mark Hinshaw, AICP, of Bellevue, Washington. "They all share at least four characteristics: They're dominated by surface parking, they're unconnected to other developments, they offer few pedestrian amenities, and their architecture is ge- neric."But strip malls also have the potential to become more urbane-if they are designed differently. Hinshaw's ideas are embod- ied in a "design objectives plan" adopted in March by the city of Bozeman, Montana. The plan includes design guidelines de- veloped by Hinshaw and an- other consultant, Hough Beck & Baird of Seattle. Bozeman, Hinshaw notes, has a rather sophisticated down- town for a town of 30,000, but the routes into town area dif- ferentstory, with miles of typi- cal strip development-huge parking lots, motels, gas sta- tions, fast food restaurants of all sorts, and massive signs. In 1990, a new master plan fo- cused attention on the city's seven "entryway" corridors, and a revised zoning code, adopted later the same year, included a provision allowing special over- lay districts to be established along the routes. A design advisory board re- viewsall development proposed in the entryway districts. A significant feature in Bozeman is an interlocal agreement with surrounding Gallatin County, which extends the advisory board's review authority three miles from the city limits. r:~ r ~`.t i ~,~~ , a i { .~. Owners of this mall in Skokie, Illinois, took advantage of a 30 percent rebate to update facades and remove old signs. The village was so pleased with the results that it now offers SO percent facade rebates in the downtown. 20 Planning May 1992 ~~ P L A N N I N G P R A C T I C E d - A Sampling of Bowman's Entryway Corridor Design Guidelines a O" m West Main-Guideline A.3: West Main-Guideline B.3: ° Encourage buildings closer to the street instead of behind ~. Major retail buildings should incorporate continuous e Iarge setbacks. Existing developments that are set back arcades over the walkway in front of the buildings. m should be encouraged to develop `out buildings"close to the 3 street that contain shops, services, and restaurants. s Y ~' • All Comdors-A.2: All Corridors-A.3: In each development, there must beat least one clearly Large retail stores or centers over 10,000 square feet and designated route for pedestrians between the street, the restaurants should be encouraged to provide usable outdoor parking area, and the main entrance. A raised walkway is spaces. Such spaces should have hard surfaces (concrete or preferred, with crosswalks designated by pavers or scored unit pavers, not asphaltJ, but should also incorporate concrete across vehicular lanes. Trees and other plantings landscaping. Seating, particularly movable seating, should be should be provided along the walkway. provided. Food vending is strongly recommended. 21 P L A R A The advisory board worked with the planning department staff and the consultants to draw up the design guidelines. Hinshaw notes that the guide- lines are simple and concise. Each is accompanied by a small, illustrative sketch and a pho- tograph of abuilt example. "We preferred positive persuasion to preaching," says Hinshaw, "so the guidelines don't include a list of 'don'ts."' The guide- lines are an addendum to the city's zoning code. One issue dealt with during the eight-month process of pre- paring the guidelines was the fact that the character of the entryway corridors was pretty well set, with one-story strip malls and related automobile- riented commercial develop- mentpredominating. The con- sultantspointed out that future remodeling and expansion would provide opportunities to influence elements of the corridors, as would infill de- velopment on remaining sites. N N I C T I With better design and more concentration of activity, says Hinshaw, the ubiquitous strip malls could actually strengthen the community's image. San Diego's strip city Think "strip" in San Diego, and you think of El Cajon Boule- vard, once the city's main entryway from the east. Acity- sponsored design study for a six-mile portion of the road won a national merit award from the American Society of Landscape Architects in 1988. The idea, says landscape ar- chitect Andrew Spurlock of Andrew Spurlock Martin Poirier, one of the firms in- volved, was to create a sense of place along the strip. The study included streetscape de- signs and guidelines, and it eventually led to a new planned district ordinance for the area known as Mid City. Like Hinshaw, Spurlock sees the potential in strip malls, not just the problems. °There's been N G C E a lot of pressure here to build mini-malls," he says, "but there's also been a lot of oppo- sition. Our idea was to create a form for strip development that would reinforce the sense of community in the Mid City area. We wanted to make the highway seem more like a com- munityboulevard." The study recommended that the six-mile stretch, which in- cludessix traffic lanes plus turn- ing-lanes, be divided into pedestrian-oriented and auto- oriented "nodes" and that six higher density, mixed-use "dis- trict centers" be developed at major intersections, with more auto-oriented "linear areas" in between. Parking for district centers is behind the stores; for the linear areas, it's in front. The business group that was involved in the study has since adopted the guidelines, and sev- eral malls have been developed as recommended, including one, with aparhnents above the stores, designed by San Diego archi- =~ B 0 3 i ~. - t...e~~~.rsw ~~ _3 ~~_~.~ As called for in Plano's retail corner guidelines, one parking lot aisle leads directly to the shopping center. tect Rob Quigley, whose firm participated in the study. The city has adopted the guidelines as development standards in its planned district ordinance. More recently, the firm has been working with Solana Beach, a city just north of San Diego. Design guidelines for its major commercial strip, Highway 101, have been in- cluded in a specific plan for the highway corridor, recently completed by a team that in- cluded Spurlock's firm and two others: Cotton Beland/ Associ- ates of Encinitas, and Richard Friedson/Visions Studio of San Diego. The plan was accepted by the city council March 1. Once again, two different types of guidelines were drawn up, with most of the road given over to auto-oriented develop- ment but one, in the down- town, identified aspedestrian- oriented. Ruth Knack is.the senior editor of Planning. The guidelines offer several alternative building arrangements. 22 Planning May 1992. Strip Malls vs. City Streets Strip malls, or strip retail cen- ters, have proliferated in larger cities in the last 10 years. For the most part, city officials have welcomed the newcomers for the convenience they offer to residents and the taxes they yield to public coffers. But they also recognize definite prob- lems: inappropriate design, danger to pedestrians, increased traffic congestion, the displace- ment of locally owned small businesses. As in the suburbs, cities have used a variety of mechanisms to mitigate the negative effects of strip malls. Among them: corridor plans and overlay zones, streetscape design guide- lines, and neighborhood dis- tricts and plans. L.A.: visual quality In southern California, mini- i V c 1~ u P L P R malls became a developer's staple in the 1980s. Los Ange- lesCounty alone has more than 2,000 of these centers. Part of the reason for the boom was the large supply of corner lots that became available as cen- tral city gas stations closed. (Some 3,000, about half the total, closed between 1975 and 1990.) The gas station lots were generally too large for a single store, too small for an office building, but just right for a mini-mall. At the same time, the city had an influx of new residents seeking to open small businesses and franchises. For them, the newly built mini- mally-with up-to-date electri- cal, phone, and mechanical sys- tems-seemed a better bet than older retail space that would require upgrading. In 1987, the city enacted a moratorium on construction of new mini-malls until new stan- dardscould be enacted. A year Washington's Park and Shop is an early example of the corner mall. Its traditionally styled buildings, arranged along two sides of a parking lot, were recently restored after a long preservation battle. One alternative in the Chicago guidelines allows the single mall building to be replaced with several smaller structures, built to the property Line, with parhing at sides and rear. A N N A C T later, the city council enacted a new mini-shopping center ordinance, which was further revised in 1990. The ordinance focuses on improving the vi- sual quality of the centers. In most cases, it requires afive- foot-wide landscaped buffer along all street frontages and along the perimeters of all park- ing areas abutting residential areas. It also requires a deco- rative screening wall or hedge to separate parking areas from the sidewalk. The Los Angeles ordinance requires mini-malls to provide four parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of building area and five spaces per 1,000 square feet if the mall contains a res- taurant. Some developers have complained, charging that the requirement has had the ef- fect of chasing away health clubs and restaurants, which now often choose not to locate in mini-malls. gga G~ a a 0 E s U I N G I C E Chicago eyes the street Chicago's Department of Plan- ningand Development has also developed new design guide- lines for strip centers on sev- eraltypes ofcommercial streets. Some 200 such malls were built in the city during the 1980s, according to Tom Smith, di- rector of zoning policy. Smith notes that, although Chicago has some 500 miles of streets zoned for commercial uses- lots ofpotential for mini-malls- lotdepth isoften only 125 feet. That's where the city runs into a problem: It would like to maintain the street wall, but the shallow lots make it diffi- cult to get developers to con- sider placing the parking be- hind, where automobile access is limited, rather than in front of the mall buildings. Smith and other local plan- ners continue to question the appropriateness ofmini-malls- and their parking-for city 23 p L A P R A neighborhoods. The city's new guidelines, by the local archi- tectural firm of McBride & Kelly, are an effort to ensure that new commercial develop- ment fits in to the historical urban form. The guidelines make distinc- tions between three types of streets: pedestrian-oriented, au- tomobile-oriented, and transi- tional (somewhere in between. The three types are character- ized by differences in land use, architectural styles, building massing, vehicular circulation and access, pedestrian access, landscaping, and signage. For each type of street, the guidelines provide alternative site designs for mini-malls. Sev- eral of the alternatives call for replacing the single mall build- ing with several smaller struc- tures, which will be built to the property line, and relegat- ing parking to the side and the rear. The alleys that are typi- a U `o E 0 6 E E d 0 v N N I C T I cally found in Chicago neigh- borhoods serve as a buffer be- tween the parking lots and ad- jacent residences. The guidelines for the pe- destrian-oriented streets focus on retaining the street wall. New construction is encour- aged to reflect the existing pat- terns-retaining the shop win- dows, for instance, rather than blank walls. Smith says these guidelines, coupled with the city's new landscaping ordi- nance, will help retain the pe- destrianorientation inthe neigh- borhoodcommercial areas "that aren't too far gone already." Bellevue's new district In 1990, Bellevue, Washing- ton, added a new community retail design district to its zon- ing ordinance to deal with just such problems. Guidelines cre- atedfor the district require each new strip center to be archi- tecturallydistinct from the oth- N G C E ern. The difference may be in its color scheme, materials, roof shape, window placement-or something else. The guidelines discourage blank walls facing public streets or adjoining properties. Mini-malls located at the in- tersection of major arterials are the subject of a special provi- sion.. The guidelines recom- mendthat a "visual landmark"- speciallandscaping, afountain, or cupola-be placed at the inter- section, visually suggesting the missing fourth wall of the typi- cal L-shaped corner mall. The district's guidelines also recommend that the mall's side- walks be extended to connect with adjoining properties and with bus stops. They further recommend that walkway pav- ing materials be distinct from those used for parking areas. More to come For the time being, the reces- sion has ended the boom. But the rash of central-city mini- mally built in the 1980s may be just a taste of what's to come as suburban-style devel- opmentcontinues tocreep into the central city. The increased emphasis on the automobile in new development can be seen as well in other types of infill development, from garage-cen- tered single-family housing to gatehouse communities to cam- pus-like office parks. Whether or not such auto-oriented de- velopment inappropriate, given its effect on the architectural and visual character of urban areas, is a question planners and citizens will be forced to deal with once the recession ends and development resumes. Marva Morris Morris is an APA senior research associate. Los Angeles has worked hard to improve the looks of its mini-malls. This two-story mall at Beverly and La Cienega boulevards incorporates office space on the second door. Parking is in the rear. 24 Planning May 1992 ournalists have been telling us for some time now that rural and small-town America is a disappearing phenomenon- except for a few special landscapes and stage-set main streets. But after 15 years of research and writing about rural America, I have concluded that reports of its de- mise are much exaggerated. Rather than disappearing, large portions of our non- metropolitanareas have evolved into some- thing new-what I call "countryfied cities." How can you tell when you come to a countryfied city? A sure sign is a combi- nation of: suburban-style houses along country roads; commercial corridors lined with stores, fast-food places, even busi- ness and professional offices; free-stand- ing factories and warehouses near a new highway interchange; and, in some areas, recreational and retirement complexes of varying size and ambition. The important point is that the countryfied city presents a critical mass of low-density urbanism over an extended rural field. Burnet County in east central Texas, for instance, is nearly 1,000 square miles in size, yet some 85 percent of the popula- tion is concentrated around Marble Falls and the recreation and retirement com- ~lexes along the Colorado River to the west. I found similar low-density concen- trations of population in the five other places I used as examples in my research on countryfied cities: Westmoreland County in southwestern Pennsylvania; Randolph County in east central Indiana; Emmet and Charlevoix counties in north- west Michigan; and Putnam County in north central Tennessee. To a large extent, the countryfied cities have replaced the old towns and small cities as residential and commercial cen- ters. In an auto-impelled age, the spread- out development is more practical, better suited to the way rural and small-town people live today. Rather than being fueled exclusively by agribusiness, as were the rural towns of yesteryear, the new settle- ments are the products of the powerful economic and demographic forces that have changed rural America since World War II: decentralization of manufactur- ing and warehousing made possible by the interstate highway system; the grow- ing number of retirees and people eager to invest in second homes; the outward creep of metropolitan office development; and the expansion of college and univer- sity systems. For some planners, this hybrid form of development-part country, part city-is something that their education and previ- ous experience has not prepared them for. They must quickly become familiar South of Chicago, in rural Will County, isolated residential development is cropping up in the midst of farmland. The author argues chat this pattern is being repeated all across the nation. The Land In-Between Neither city nor country, our burgeoning nonmetro areas need some serious rethinking. By J. C. Doherty with things like the latest in septic tank technology, the intricacies of conserva- tion districts, and Farmers Home Admin- istration community facilities programs. Modest proposals The county, regional, and state-level plan- ners Iinterviewed in six eastern and midwestern states spoke frequently of the need for regional programs designed specifically to deal with growth in mixed rural-urban areas. In fact, regional government is as rare outside the beltways of the nation as it is within them. In the seven counties I ex- amined are 30 small cities, 51 boroughs and villages, 63 townships, and 20 New England-style towns. Their governments function within their borders, of course, but their borders no longer contain all or even most of the preferred locations for business, industry, and housing. In my opinion, the identifiable country- fiedcity needs a government with powers to adopt regional plans, regulate land and development, and write capital budgets.. If a city of 3,000 can do all this, why can't a countryfied city of 30,000? Everyone knowledgeable about govern- ment knows the answer. The local gov- ernments involved would have to give up a big chunk of their sovereignty, if not go out of business. This is not going to happen. But there are other possibilities. The state legislature can enact laws and adopt policies that encourage planning and land regulation in the types of areas we are talking about. Two examples: The Penn- sylvania legislature in 1987 passed a law encouraging small cities and boroughs "no longer considered economically vi- able" to consolidate with healthier ones. And in 1988 the Vermont legislature passed Act 200, which reinvigorated regional plan- ning among the towns in that state. A starting point would be the creation of a standing commission on growth, whose role would be to report on trends such as the development of these new urban forms. An example is Vermont's Costle Commission, whose 1987 "guidelines for growth" report led to the passage of Act 200. Such blue-