Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/10/2000 P&Z MinutesPlanning & Zoning Board May 10, 2000 Page 1 CITY OF LINO LAKES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MINUTES DATE TIME STARTEI): TIME ENDED MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT STAFF PRESENT May 10, 21 630 PM. 7:32. P.M. : Johnson, Schaps, Rafferty, Schilling, Zyc Corson arrived at 6 46 • Lane : City Planner Smyser; Planning Coordinato WyIand City Engineer Powell; Assistant Economic pment Directn I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Chair Schaps called the Lino Lakes Planni p.m., May 10, 2000. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — Mr. Schilling made a MOTI the Lino Lakes Planning carried 5 -0. III. APPROVAL 0 Board meeting to order at 6:30 e the minutes of the April 12, 2000, meeting of g Board, and was supported by Mr. Rafferty. Motion Chair Schaps infor all present that comments will be accepted on the Town Center Development Stand ds and the public hearing will be continued to the June 14, 2000 meeting to allow an opportunity for additional input. The agenda was approved as presented. IV. OPEN MIKE Chair Schaps declared open mike open at 6:33 p.m. No one was present for open mike. Mr. Johnson made a MOTION to close open mike at 6:34 p.m., and was supported by Mr. Rafferty. Motion carried 6 -0. • • • Planning & Zoning Board May 10, 2000 Page 2 V. ACTION ITEMS A. Carl Johnson, 310 Carl Street, Variance Staff advised that the applicant, Carl Johnson, has submitted an application for a variance from the City's Zoning Ordinance, Section 3, Subd. 4.D. Accessory Buildings and Structures, 1. General Provision. C. No detached accessory structure shall be closer to the front lot line than the principal building or its attached garage. Staff presented their report and analysis of the application and comment that the current Zoning Ordinance prohibits the construction of an accessory building in front of the principal structure. The development plan for the lots in Lino Air Park North initially indicated that the hanger location would be toward the runway. The unique nature of the drainage easement on the lot does not constitute a hardship because the home and accessory building could be constructed to meet the requirements of the Ordinance by locating the hanger to the rear of the lot. Therefore, staff recommends denial of the request nce. Staff noted the letter from the applicant explaining his abutting property owners and the Air Park Associatio In response to Mr. Rafferty, Ms. Wyland point owners submitted letters of support for Joh Mr. Rafferty stated he talked with Sta indicated something different than letter is signed by David Ramsd ters from two o concern. e low: Lion of the homes where the t. t about 5:00 p.m. this evening who the letter. Ms. Wyland noted that the amsden. Mr. Rafferty stated he tal d� ' 'resident of the first house off Thomas Street who is a x�r member of the Associ t d ough they had no clear -cut recommendation on whether this should be t ed, there was an indication they should have dealt with it. Mr. Schilling inqu, her all three properties that built in front was done so prior to the ordinance chan • Ms. Wyland answered affirmatively. Chair Schaps stated his understanding of the route that would be taken by an aircraft from the hanger to the runway. He noted the plane would be between 70 and 30 feet from the street when taxing. Chair Schaps stated that is not his understanding of why these lots were approved. Mr. Johnson noted the two survey maps, one indicating the area is not within the ponding and flowage easement which could be a building pad, and the other survey indicating the proposed house would be located in an area within the easement. Ms. Wyland explained how the easement area was revised and reconfigured. Mr. Johnson noted there is nothing (easement or wetlands) to prevent the hanger from being built between the proposed location of the house and the taxiway. Ms. Wyland stated that is correct. • Planning & Zoning Board May 10, 2000 Page 3 Mr. Rafferty stated he agrees with Mr. Johnson and does not understand what type of hardship would force the hanger to be at the location by the street. Ms. Wyland stated that is also staff's finding. However, the applicant would prefer the view of the runway from his front window rather than a view of the hanger. Mr. Johnson made a MOTION to deny the variance request by Carl Johnson, 310 Carl Street, based on the rationale that the development plan for the lots in Lino Air Park North initially indicated that the hanger location would be toward the runway, the unique nature of the drainage easement on the lot does not constitute a hardship, and the property could be put to a reasonable use because the home and accessory building could be constructed to meet the requirements of the Ordinance by locating the hanger to the rear of the lot and was supported by Mr. Rafferty. Motion carried 5 -0. Mr. Corson arrived at 6:46 p.m. B. Rehbein Companies & Independent School Dist #12;4 inor Subdivision Staff presented the joint application by Rehbein Co District #12 for two minor subdivisions that will fo the Centennial Middle School was constructed application and recommends approval of t noted that staff has submitted this inform right -of -way will be required along L required by the County, a revised will be necessary prior to Counc recording. Mr. Rafferty stated he this transaction betwee Superintendent concerned there h school. dependent School and exchange made when ese ed their analysis of this vision as requested. It was noka County to determine if additional ould additional right -of -way be urvey showing the roadway dedication deed transferring title prior to document hool Superintendent John McClellan who explained and Rehbein Companies and their swapping of land. icated he would support the minor subdivision but is een an indication that Fourth Street will continue past the Ms. Wyland stated the development of the Rehbein property will be served off a cul -de- sac so it is not the intention to bring industrial traffic through on Fourth Avenue. Mr. Schilling made a MOTION to approve the minor subdivision as requested by Rehbein Companies and Independent School District #12 that will formalize a land exchange made when the Centennial Middle School was constructed and was supported by Mr. Rafferty. Motion carried 5 -1 (Zych). C. Bluebill Ponds, Preliminary Plat, Main Street Staff advised that Heritage Development has submitted revised plans that include a four - way intersection and an extended Wood Duck Trail and been successful in negotiations with the House of Praise Church that allows the extension of Wood Duck Trail. However, numerous engineering issues remain unresolved which are significant enough Planning & Zoning Board May 10, 2000 Page 4 that staff cannot recommend approval. Staff advised of the road and lot reconfiguration and recommended this item be continued to allow the applicant to redesign the plat and supply additional information to address unresolved issues. It was noted that the developer has agreed to an extension of the review of the project for an additional 60 days to allow time to resolve the issues. Mr. Corson made a MOTION to continue this item to allow the applicant to redesign the plat and supply additional information to address unresolved issues and was supported by Mr. Rafferty. Motion carried 6 -0. D. PUBLIC HEARING, Town Center Development Standards Chair Schaps declared the continued public hearing reopened at 7:00 p.m. and reiterated that this public hearing will be continued again to the June 14, 2000 meeting. Staff advised that the public hearing was continued from th ing to allow for additional discussion and comment. Comments were o red + pril 12, 2000 meeting and the primary concerns of the landowners •• • • +nd the extent of the requirements for development in the Town Center e 1 ieve the standards are too restrictive. Concern was also expressed about � ct o 77th Street and Caroles �a�t�a. Estates neighborhood. Staff is in discussio s developers and in view of that, refrained from making comment just in c di - nt circumstances evolve. Staff urged the Planning and Zoni desire for mixed uses in the To friendly, and optimal use of standards and degree of st recommends comment June 14, 2000 meeting. lose sight of the larger picture and ff noted the goals for mixed use, pedestrian e 1 by promoting higher densities, noting the uilding design, etc. can be modified, if desired. Staff scussion held, and the public hearing continued to the Ross Fefercorn, re nd commercial developer, 7625 Metro Boulevard, Edina, reviewed their expe ce with residential and commercial developments and his architectural backgro nd. He explained how he became aware of Lino Lake's consideration of these design standards and reviewed the areas and types of commercial /residential developments they currently have underway. Mr. Fefercorn advised of a retail commercial/residential townhouse project they constructed. He stated they encountered a problem with screening the commercial from the residential use and their finding that it would have been better to incorporate them in a pedestrian friendly manner. Mr. Fefercorn stated his interest in exploring opportunities to develop a project in the Town Center and advised of examples of early mixed use plans that continue to be very successful, such as in Lake Forest, Illinois which was designed in 1908 and remains very successful, increasing in value. He stated he believes the proposed standards will create a high value quality residential and commercial project for Lino Lakes that will be successful. Mr. Johnson asked for locations of comparable projects. • • Planning & Zoning Board May 10, 2000 Page 5 Mr. Fefercorn stated they are working on one in Mendota Heights which is not yet built but in the planning stages. He stated the other projects they have done had retail developments separate from residential projects and his belief that higher quality standards will result in allowing these two uses to be combined and work together. Mr. Fefercorn stated they are constructing back -to -back townhomes in the Round Oak Marsh Golf Course in Oakdale. He stated they also constructed 76 townhomes called Evergreen Country Homes in Woodbury. Mr. Fefercorn stated in that project they constructed a very larger berm but now they have found interest in providing a walking trail rather than a large berm which created a barrier and restriction. He commented on the desirability of considering how the two uses can be integrated via higher design standards rather than creating berming/landscaping. However, he agreed not all commercial uses are the right scale to be integrated with residential uses. Mr. Smyser again urged the Commission to keep the larger picture in mind and advised that anyone interested in viewing the design standards can soy . t of staff. Mr. Johnson asked if other developers can be invited to Jul= . Ming to offer comment. Mr. Smyser stated staff could contact dev Johnson indicated an interest in hearing from other Mr. Rafferty stated staff has spent a great about the desire of pedestrian friendly are seasons so he would like the City to i unsure of development possibilitie Mr. Johnson made a MOTIO Planning and Zoning Boar 6 -0. VI. DISCUSSION I e that request. Mr. this document and comments but Minnesota does have a change of igns to make it work. He stated he is ff to further their efforts. e the public hearing to the June 14, 2000 g, and was supported by Mr. Corson. Motion carried A. Tree Preser tion Ordinance — Public Hearing Scheduled for June 14, 2000 Julie Farnham, TKDA, presented the proposed tree preservation ordinance, noting it has already been reviewed by the Environmental Board. She noted this applies to private properties so the ordinance defines where it is applicable, information that needs to be submitted, required security, and standards for replacement. She offered to answer questions. Mr. Johnson asked if this ordinance is standard when compared to other communities. Ms. Farnham stated it is but references the Environmental Handbook and inventory which the City has already completed. Mr. Corson noted the section defining replacements identifies trees not to be used but when indicating trees to be removed, specific species are not referenced. Ms. Farnham referred to the definition section which defines "significant" trees. She explained the list of prohibited trees is to not encourage the replanting of those types of trees. • • Planning & Zoning Board May 10, 2000 Page 6 Mr. Corson noted the large areas of wetland in Lino Lakes and if cottonwoods or poplar were to be removed, they could not be replaced. Ms. Farnham noted the language does allow some leeway and if desired, that could be allowed for all tree species. However, the City Forester indicated no objection to this proposed language. Chair Schaps asked if a cottonwood tree is considered to be "significant." Ms. Farnham stated it is. Chair Schaps commented that larger softwood trees can be a danger during a high wind or storm asked if any investigation has occurred regarding that factor. Ms. Farnham noted that a softwood tree has to be larger in size than a hardwood tree to be considered "significant." Mr. Johnson supported allowing the City Forester discretion when determining what trees should be removed, even if classified as significant. Ms. Farnham stated that reference to diseased trees can be included. Mr. Corson asked if the ordinance provides an opportu becomes an issue. Ms. Farnham advised that someo or debate if it a variance. Mr. Rafferty asked about the security deposit c eq''ed and if it is $1,000. Mr. Smyser stated the Environmental Board w with a $1,000 security but the inspector can make an estimate based on a ite i ection. Chair Schaps noted that no action public hearing on June 14, 2000 VII. ADJOURNMENT ht and the ordinance is scheduled for Mr. Johnson made a N to adjourn the meeting at 7:32 p.m., and was supported by Mr. Schilling. Respectfully submi ied 6 -0. Carla Wirth, Recording Secretary TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.