Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/11/2024 P & Z MinutesAPPROVED MINUTES CITY OF LINO LAKES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MINUTES 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Chair Root called the Lino Lakes Planning & Zoning Board meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. on September 11, 2024. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. PUBLIC COMMENT Mr. Root declared public comment open at 6:36 p.m. Carol Featherstone, 631 Andall Street, Lino Lakes, MN 55014, Ms. Featherstone expressed her opposition to the construction of Street C to Andall Street. She said other residents have also expressed their opposition to Street C as it would affect wildlife, preservation of wetland and trees and resident safety with the new development. She stated there are trees being removed that are 80 to 100 years old. She also mentioned other developments that only have one in and out access point. She encouraged the board to view the City Council packet from august 22, 2016 regarding the St Clair Estates found on page 81 and 82. She requested if Street C was necessary, the City provide the proof, otherwise she would like it removed from the planning. Phillip Hallstrom, 620 Andall Street, Lino Lakes, MN 55014, Mr. Hallstrom said he agrees with Ms. Featherstone’s points. He would like to see MI Homes provide parking at arena acres in lieu of building a park. He said they were given an opt out for the park as arena acres and the elementary school were nearby. DATE: September 11, 2024 TIME STARTED: 6:30 P.M. TIME ENDED: 10:04 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Isaac Wipperfurth, Nathan Vojtech, Neil Evenson Michael Root, Suzy Guthmueller, Perry Laden, Patrick Kohler MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Michael Grochala, Katie Larsen, Julie Whitney Planning & Zoning Board September 11, 2024 Page 2 DRAFT MINUTES Mr. Vojtech moved to close public comment. Motion seconded by Mr. Evenson. Public comment was closed at 6:42 p.m. Motion carried 7 – 0. 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA The agenda was approved as presented. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Vojtech moved to approve the August 14, 2024 meeting minutes. Motion seconded by Mr. Wipperfurth. Mr. Kohler abstained. Motion carried 6 – 0. 6. ACTION ITEMS A. Public Hearing: Slater Addition Preliminary Plat Ms. Larsen presented the staff report. The applicant, Boulder Contracting, submitted a land use application for preliminary plat for Slater Addition. The applicant proposes to subdivide the existing parcel located at 7869 Meadow View Trail into three (3) single family lots for the purpose of constructing two (2) new single-family homes. The lot is 1.41 gross acres (61,294 sf). Mr. Wipperfurth asked if the houses were guided towards low density in the comp plan. Ms. Larsen stated they were. Mr. Laden asked where the definition of front yard came from and thought it was senseless that a house addressed and accessed on one street that we would redefine as a side yard. Ms. Larsen said it came from our zoning ordinance and is a common planning practice. George Slater, 7869 Meadowview Trail, Lino Lakes, MN 55014, the homeowner just reiterated what Ms. Larsen said during the staff report. Mr. Root opened the public hearing at 7:00 p.m. No public comments were made. Planning & Zoning Board September 11, 2024 Page 3 DRAFT MINUTES Mr. Kohler moved to close the public hearing. Motion seconded by Mr. Vojtech. The public hearing was closed at 7:00 p.m. Mr. Laden moved to approve the preliminary plat subject to conditions listed in the staff report. Motion seconded by Mr. Evenson. Motion carried 7-0. B. Public Hearing: Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment-Home Occupation Permits The applicant, Connor Mattioli, submitted a Land Use Application for a Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment to allow for home occupation businesses related to or involving explosives, ammunition or weapons. Mr. Kohler said he was not comfortable with this and thinks there should be local knowledge with the City. Ms. Larsen stated that is what the ATF is doing. If the ordinance is amended the applicants would require a Home Occupation permit and the City would know where these locations are. Mr. Laden asked if this could be done as a conditional use permit. Ms. Larsen said the level C takes it to a conditional use permit. Mr. Root discussed the report the applicant provided and thinks there should be a limit to quantity. Mr. Root reviewed research of other communities and in Coon Rapids ammunition manufacturing is prohibited, in Ramsey firearm sales and repair are allowed but ammunition manufacturing is prohibited. In St Louis Park firearm sales are prohibited. Mr. Root is not opposed to the idea but feels like there is more information that is needed in the different classifications, such as proximity to other residents an d the quantity of material that is able to be kept on site to maintain safety. He thought it to be important to get more information on fire prevention and fire suppression when there are explosives or ammunition. Ms. Larsen said it is possible to allow guns but no explosives and ammunition. Mr. Root thinks the quantity should be limited to the proximity to other residents. Ms. Larsen said there are no personal use limits to the amount you can have on your property. Mr. Vojtech questioned if an applicant rented a business storefront would this type of business be permissible there. Ms. Larsen said it would in a commercial zoning district. Mr. Grochala stated it gets more complicated with the requirement of limiting amounts as there would need to be an inspection to track those amounts. He said it would be simplest to limit to sales and repair. They would still need to go through the requirement of the FFL. Connor Mattioli, 7607 Quarter Horse Ct, Lino Lakes, MN 55014, is the applicant for this text amendment. He stated the ATF has a yearly inspection for explosives when you are in that class, and he is not. He said he is designing and manufacturing firearms. The manufacturing is done off site, but the amendment would allow him to manufacture on site. He stated he has seen other language in City code prohibiting the use of tools that Planning & Zoning Board September 11, 2024 Page 4 DRAFT MINUTES are not commonly found in households and said that may be an option. He said the way the ATF defines manufacturing is putting two parts of a firearm together. He said he recently had to close out his FFL due to moving into Lino Lakes and needing to conform to the laws in our City. If his business is permitted in the City he will need to reapply and go through that process including a home inspection. Mr. Root stated the concern is the quantity of manufacturing materials and explosives. Mr. Root questioned if the amendment was limited to weapons if it would affect Mr. Mattioli’s business. Mr. Mattioli stated it would not. Mr. Root also expressed concern over the storage of ammunition material. Mr. Mattioli assured there were ATF requirements for storage. Mr. Root summarized there were concerns regarding the ammunition and explosives. Ms. Guthmueller wanted to know about ATF licensing and what he is looking to do . Mr. Mattioli said he would like to open a shop that manufactures firearms. He is looking to design and manufacture a better process for producing firearms. He said his work is currently done on a computer and the manufacturing of the firing components is done offsite through a third party. They are sent back to Mr. Mattioli where he puts them together and sells them and the process is regulated by the ATF with inspections. Ms. Guthmueller questioned the number of sales he has done. Mr. Mattioli said he has sold two because he is mostly into manufacturer researching and getting the parts sent to him. He said with the parts he is receiving he is testing them to see if they fit properly. If they do not, they are destroyed, and he goes back to the drawing board to redesign. Mr. Vojtech feels like it should not be allowed in neighborhoods. Mr. Laden has no problem with the firearm as long as there is no on site testing of the firearm. He is uncomfortable with the ammunition and explosives. Mr. Kohler wants the fire department to know there is a house containing explosives when responding to the residence. Mr. Root opened the public hearing at 7:36 p.m. Alexandra Rudy, 7612 Mustang Lane, Lino Lakes, MN 55014, Ms. Rudy understands the applicant only gets two guns per year but there is a daycare near the applicant’s residence. She knows he is building a fence around the property but didn’t understand the reason behind it. She does not think the ATF has strict enough rules or oversight. Carol Featherstone, 631 Andall Street, Lino Lakes, MN 55014, Ms. Featherstone said because this applies to everyone coming in and we will not know what will be brought in under this ordinance, she has real concerns over ammunition and explosives. Planning & Zoning Board September 11, 2024 Page 5 DRAFT MINUTES Mr. Evenson moved to close the public hearing. Motion seconded by Mr. Kohler. The public hearing was closed at 7:39 p.m. Mr. Laden requested roll call to see where everyone was at. Mr. Evenson wants to keep the explosives out of the ordinance. He is ok with the ammunition and weapons. Ms. Guthmueller does not think we need to change the ordinance for one application. Mr. Laden no objection to the firearm portion and no objection to this business. He agrees there is not enough information to change the ordinance. Mr. Wipperfurth said it is already a regulated business by the ATF and our police department had no concerns with it. He thinks the explosives should stay banned in the ordinance. Mr. Kohler, leave the explosives in but keep at a B business. Wants them to have to pull a permit. Ms. Larsen said it is already a requirement and they are forwarded to the police department. Mr. Vojtech is not in favor whatsoever and would like them all kept in the ordinance as banned in our city. Mr. Root wants weapons removed from the ordinance. He felt in the future with more information we could possibly remove the ammunition in the ordinance. He thought the small scale manufacturing is acceptable as it remains within the class B home occupation. Mr. Evenson moved to approve the Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment for Home Occupation striking ammunition or weapons from the ordinance. Motion seconded by Mr. Wipperfurth. A roll call vote was requested when there was opposition from several members. Mr. Vojtech – opposed, Mr. Kohler - approved, Mr. Wipperfurth – approved, Mr. Laden – opposed, Ms. Guthmueller – opposed, Mr. Evenson – opposed, Mr. Root – opposed. Motion fails. Mr. Laden moved to strike weapons from the ordinance. Motion was seconded by Mr. Root. Motion was carried 5 – 2. C. Natures Refuge North Revised PUD Concept Plan Review The applicant, M/I Homes of Minneapolis/St. Paul, LLC, originally submitted a land use application for PUD Concept Plan (“concept plan”) review in October 2023. The concept plan was reviewed by the City’s Advisory Boards and City Council. The applicant has now submitted a revised concept plan based on public, staff, Board and Council comments Planning & Zoning Board September 11, 2024 Page 6 DRAFT MINUTES for additional review and comment. The development contains 2 parcels totaling approximately 60 gross acres. It is located north of Natures Refuge and is called Natures Refuge North. Mr. Laden is not in favor of the garage forward with the smaller lot sizes. He is in favor of the Street C connection. Mr. Wipperfurth is in favor of the street C connection as it eases traffic and thought it should have a trail or sidewalk. He does not like that all the lots are villa lots now. He wants single family lots, not just one type. He is ok with the villa garage size. Ms. Guthmueller does not think it is smart to have the smaller garage. She thinks 60 ft wide street is not wide enough. Mr. Kohler agreed. Mr. Vojtech does not like the connection for Street C from a higher density to lower density neighborhood. He is comfortable keeping the garage sizes. Mr. Evenson is in favor of the villas because it is a preferred product. Mr. Root is not against the garage being forward and thought it would be nice to get a footprint of the garage as to how many vehicles can fit in the garage. He thought the porch coming out forward is acceptable as well and agrees with Mr. Laden. Ms. Emily Becker with MI Homes addressed the Board’s comments. D. Wilkinson Waters PUD Concept Plan Review The applicant, Wilkinson Waters LLC, is proposing a master planned development located on North Oaks Company Inc. property located south of County Road J/Ash Street/CSAH 32, west of Centerville Road/CSAH 21 and north of Wilkinson Lake Boulevard. The development contains 4 parcels totaling approximately 76 gross acres 2 and consists of mix of residential housing types and commercial development. The proposed development is called Wilkinson Waters. Laden is in favor of the studio apartments and has no problem with the building height. Would like to see a high architecture standard for the business’s due to the gateway. He also thinks is good for the City to have affordable housing. Wipperfurth questioned if the City is concerned about water quality issues. Mr. Grochala said they are having conversation with VLAWMO and North Oaks Corporation regarding a wetland creation on the northwest end of Wilkinson Lake for wetland restoration. He also said the water system is looped back on itself. Mr. Wipperfurth agrees with the high architectural standards along Centerville Road and Ash Street and Planning & Zoning Board September 11, 2024 Page 7 DRAFT MINUTES thinks there should be a commercial component for the gateway. He thought Ms. Larsen’s comments about moving the senior living building further east would cause some of the commercial development area to be minimized or push the larger buildings closer to the single-family residential areas. He is comfortable with the taller building height but not with the guidance at 348. Mr. Evenson is comfortable with the studios and the building height. He would like to see more affordable housing. He would like to see trails but understands that area is wet. Mr. Vojtech is not in favor of the apartment building location on the property or when entering the gateway. He would like it moved back on the property. He is comfortable with the studio apartment but would also like to see more affordable housing. Mr. Kohler likes the location of the apartment building. He does not think the development needs affordability to it. He thinks the builder needs to make money on the development. He links the non-potable water system. Ms. Guthmueller questioned what the park fees were used for. Mr. Grochala said the monies can be used for trail or boardwalk costs. A portion will go to the regional trails and our City wide facilities. It is generally reserved for parks in the development area. She also likes the senior living building where it is and likes the retail that is planned. She thinks the apartment building is too dense. She wondered if the Board should be looking at density when there are several studio apartments. Mr. Vojtech is in favor of changing the area to General Business. Mr. Root is in alignment with the comments made by the Board. He thinks retail is key to the development and agrees to having greater flexibility with General Business. He also agrees with the studio apartments. The applicant Mark Houge is with the North Oaks Company located at 5959 Centerville Road, North Oaks, MN 55127. He introduced Lauren Grouws, VP of Development and Jeremy Foss with ISG Engineers. He said Waverly Gardens was the vision to relate to for this development even though they are in two different cities. The building location is due to the proximity of their other building as they share staff. They also like preserving the corner coming into the gateway for single level commercial building. Th ey are contemplating making a trail connection west to Rapp farm. He said the water is a dead-end line that goes to Rapp farm serving 156 homes. He said long term they would prefer loops but believes the water would be very high quality. He would like to use a portion of the park dollars on site for the trail connection to the west. Planning & Zoning Board September 11, 2024 Page 8 DRAFT MINUTES Mr. Kohler asked the timeline of the project. Mr. Houge said they would start with the apartment building then go into the town home development and then the commercial property over three years. Mr. Laden said he would like to see a tot lot that is associated with the apartment as there will be families living there. Mr. Houge said there is a green space in the center of the development that is allocated for recreational facilities. 7. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Project Update Mr. Wipperfurth moved to adjourn the meeting. Motion seconded by Mr. Vojtech. Meeting adjourned at 10:04 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Julie Whitney – Community Development Administrative Assistant