Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/08/1989 P&Z Minutes• • • PLANNING & ZONING MEETING NOVEMBER 8, 1989 The regular meeting of the Lino Lakes Planning and Zoning Board was brought to order by Chairman Charles Prokop at 7:00 p.m. at the Lino Lakes City Hall. Members present were: Chairman Charles Prokop, Boardmembers Alan Irwin, Robert King, Sally Kuether, Al Robinson and Fred Chase joined the meeting at 7:24 p.m. Also present were: City Planner, John Miller; City Engineer, Ron Stahlberg; Building Official, Pete Kluegel, and Planning Secretary, Laura Elken. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES Mr. Irwin asked for the following changes to be made. Pg. 5, paragraph 5. Instead of John Miller stated that the parcels are in a retail zoned area. It should read: John Miller stated that not all parcels are in a retail zoned area. Pg. 7, paragraph 1. Instead of "the cul -de- sac's" it should read "the lots on the cul- de- sac's" Robert King moved to approve the minutes of the October Planning and Zoning Meeting as corrected. Sally Kuether seconded the motion and the motion was approved unanimously. REQUEST FROM CINDY EVANS FOR AN INTERPRETATION OF A NON- CONFORMING ISSUE AT THE FORMER MERRY -MAIDS PROPERTY LOCATED ON HODGSON ROAD. Monica Meyer is the present owner of property on 6352 Hodgson Road. Originally this property was zoned Commercial -Light and housed a beauty salon. It was a beauty salon for ten years and then became an Insurance Office, and then became the business and office of Merry Maids. Cindy Evans wishes to purchase the land from Meyer and locate a beauty shop on the property. The parcel is now zoned R -1, Single- Family and the business use of the land is as a legal non - conforming use. Section 4, Subd. 3 of the city's zoning ordinance addresses the issue of non - conforming uses. 1. Any structure or use lawfully existing upon the effective date of this Ordinance may be continued at the size and in a matter of operation existing upon such date except as hereinafter specified. 2. No structural alterations shall be made. Page 1 • PLANNING & ZONING MEETING NOVEMBER 8, 1989 3. When any lawful nonconforming use of any structure or land in any district has been changed to a conforming use, it shall not thereafter be changed to any nonconforming use. 4. Whenever a nonconforming structure shall have been damaged by fire, flood, explosion, earthquake, war, riot, or act of God, it may be reconstructed and used as before if it be reconstructed within twelve (12) months after such calamity, unless the damage to the structure is seventy -five percent (759) or more of its fair market value (as estimated by City Council or its representatives), in which case the reconstruction shall be for a use in accordance with the provisions of this Ordinance. 5. Whenever a lawful, nonconforming use of a building or structure or land is discontinued for a period of one (1) year, any future use of said building or structure or land shall be in conformity with the provisions of this Ordinance. 6. Any nonconforming use of open land, that is use of land without buildings, lawfully existing upon the effective date of this Ordinance may be continued for a period of three (3) years after the effective date of this Ordinance, whereupon such nonconforming use shall cease. 7. Normal maintenance of a building or other structure containing or related to a nonconforming use is permitted, including necessary repairs and incidental alterations which do not extend or intensify the nonconforming use. 8. A lawful nonconforming use may be changed only to a use that decreases its nonconformity. The issue here is that this business is a non - conforming use in the R -1 zone. According to City Ordinance the business could change as long the new business is not intensified. In other words the business could stay the same, decrease, but not become larger or expand. John Miller spoke with the city's Traffic Engineer, Glen VanWormer, to determine what the volumes of traffic might be. He used a 1500 square foot office with ten employees compared to a 1500 beauty shop. Using ITE guidelines he found the office would generate 50 trips daily compared to 250 trips for the beauty shop. Roger Meyer, brother -in -law of Meyer stated that before Merry Maids when it was an insurance business the traffic would Page 2 PLANNING & ZONING MEETING NOVEMBER 8, 1989 • greater than it would be for the beauty shop in his opinion. • Cindy Evans stated that she spoke with Sue Hodad from the Transportation Department. Cindy explained that she has one full -time employee plus herself working full -time and two part -time employees. Sue felt that with the square footage and the number of employees would not interfere with rush hour traffic, and not considered to have a impact on the traffic flow. Gene MacNameir, owner of Merry Maids stated that an average of 25 to 30 cars per day between 7:30 and 8:00 am drive into the business, and she doesn't feel that the beauty shop would create this much traffic. Robert King asked how many chairs would be in the shop. Cindy stated five. The original beauty shop had between four and five chairs. When the business was an insurance office there were many times the parking lot (which holds approximately 20 cars) was full.. Jack Evans stated that with only five chairs it would be probable that at the most only 10 cars at a time would be parked. Cindy Evans stated that every weekday morning only 1 hairstylist is there and two stylists in the afternoons. On Saturdays is the only day that five stylist would be working and four stylists on Friday. Al Robinson explained that the people in the audience aren't aware of the complications in this matter. It would not be fair to set a precedence and allow a non - conforming business to intensify. There was considerable discussion comparing Merry Maids to the beauty salon. MOTION: Alan Irwin moved that since the rezone from Commercial to R -1 Single- Family in 1983 the business Merry Maids at 6352 Hodgson road existed with 25 to 30 employees and the rezoning made Merry Maids operation a non- conforming use it is the interpretation that the proposed beauty salon of five chairs would decrease the non - conformity and therefore should be allowed. Al Robinson seconded the motion and the motion was approved with Mr. Chase abstaining because he joined the meeting half way through discussion. This issue does not have to appear before the City Council for approval. REVIEW OF MINOR SUBDIVISION REQUEST FROM NICHOLAS Page 3 PLANNING & ZONING MEETING NOVEMBER 8, 1989 SCHNEIDERMAN FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7038 SUNRISE DRIVE, APPLICATION #89 -50. Nicholas and Betty Schneiderman are the owners of Lot 20, Block 2 of Ulmer's Rice Lake 3rd Addition. The parcel measures 162x312 feet and covers an area of about 1.16 acre. Presently the applicants have a single- family residence located on the lot. The applicant wishes to subdivide this one -acre parcel into four lots, three vacant lots to be offered for sale and one lot where their residence is located. The proposed lots meet the city's minimum standards for the city's R -1 single - family zoning district. Two of the lots will be 81 x 150 feet and two will be 81 feet wide with a depth of about 162 feet. Park dedication will be collected for the three vacant lots. Ron Stahlberg stated that drainage has to be worked out from Sunnygate and Sunrise Meadows. Ron explained that special assessments have not been decided on at this time, but special assessments will be made on this property. After further discussion a motion was made. MOTION: Mr. King moved to recommend to City Council approval of a Minor Subdivision for Nicholas Schneiderman for property located at 7038 Sunrise Drive, Application #89 -50 subdividing the parcel into four lots as indicated on the survey submitted to the board. Mr. Chase seconded the motion and the motion was approved unanimously. REVIEW OF SITE AND BUILDING PLAN FOR PAUL WOLTERS FOR A STORAGE BUILDING AND AN OFFICE ADDITION FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7791 LAKE DRIVE, APPLICATION #89 -51. Paul Wolters owns land at 7791 Lake Drive that is currently used as a well drilling shop and as the site of C and D Auto Repair. The applicant has constructed two separate principal structures on the land. In addition he built the adjacent structure south of the property that until recently housed the "silent auction" discount house. John Miller believes this is Mr. Wolters sixth visit to the board. The following is from the October 30, 1989 Memorandum that John submitted for the board's review. Presently Wolters wishes to construct a wood frame 40x40 foot cold storage accessory building west of the current will shop. The structure would be used to store pipe and fittings Page 4 PLANNING & ZONING MEETING NOVEMBER 8, 1989 currently stored outside or in one of two vans permanently located on the property. In addition the applicant wishes to construct an office addition to the front of the building housing the C and D Auto Repair shop. The addition would measure 14x40 feet and be similar in appearance to the office at the well shop. When the city council approved the site and building plan for the well shop in 1981 it was with the following requirements: 1. Fencing required. 2. No exterior storage on the south side of the property. 3. Trees and bushes be planted. 4. Permanent sign be erected. 5. Hard surfaced driveway and parking area. Later, in 1985, when the auto repair shop was approved the conditional use permit had the following conditions: 1. Wooden fence be extended along south of the property to the pond in the rear and 40 feet on the west side. 2. All access drives be paved with a minimum of 12 foot wide bituminous or concrete surface. 3. Exterior storage area be filled with a minimum of Class #5 surface. 4. Exterior storage be limited to ten vehicles and no other equipment parts or product. 5. A $1,500.00 escrow be retained until completion of the above. At this point let me add some comments about the attached site plan and the condition of Mr. Wolters property. The west side of the applicant's land is shown to include a pond lilacs and green space. It also shows a six foot high chain link fence with inserts extending across a portion of the rear lot. In actuality the fence is unpainted wood. The lilacs do not exist and green space is covered with gravel and ground bituminous. It has been used for outside storage including junked automobiles. The site plan shows "Exist. Trees" along the north boundary of the property. They do not exist and indeed the applicant Page 5 PLANNING & ZONING MEETING NOVEMBER 8, 1989 and his neighbor EJM Pipe have both extended their storage yards to the chain link fence dividing the properties. It must also be reported that the site is generally a mess. When I viewed the two businesses prior to completing this report I found the following junked items. • 1. Wire 2. Mufflers 3. Tires 4. Water heaters 5. Metal 6. Bicycle 7. Pipe 8. Pallets 9. Pole barn metal 10. Inoperable autos 11. Inoperable trucks 12. Hoses 13. Batteries 14. Mower In addition weeds were growing adjacent to the existing welding shop and drain oil had been spilled near the auto repair shop. Presently the auto repair shop functions more like a salvage business than an engine or transmission shop. The main activity of the C and D business has been replacing diesel engines in General Motors cars and trucks with gasoline engines. This has been done primarily for resale of the vehicles. To buy gasoline engines more economically C and D has purchased junk vehicles and removed the engine blocks for exchange. The junked vehicles have stayed on site. The total number of vehicles stored was as high as 40 though now there are approximately 15 vehicles on the site. Remember, C and D was limited to ten vehicles in the 1985 conditional use permit. Comprehensive Plan: The 1987 comprehensive plan amendment • shows this land planned for expansion residential uses. Zoning Ordinance: The land is presently zoned for "L -I" Light Page 6 PLANNING & ZONING MEETING NOVEMBER 8, 1989 Industrial uses. Permitted uses in this zone include contractor shops for planting, excavating and general contractors "...but not storage yards." The open storage of materials and equipment is permitted as a conditional use but fencing and screening are required. Section 6, Subd. 16 (6) requires a buffer in certain instances including: Where a side or rear lot line in an L -I District coincides with an adjacent Residential or Commercial District, or public road right -of -way, a landscape buffer area shall be provided along such side or rear lot line not less than 40 feet in depth and shall contain landscaping, planting, berming or other effective screening suitable to provide an effective 50 percent screen. The land immediately south of the site is zoned for General Business. Section 8 of the zoning ordinance deals with parking requirements. In particular contractors shops and yards are required to provide two spaces for each employee. Section 8, Subd. 4 (c) states: Surfacing and Drainage. All off - street parking areas except permitted uses in the R and ER districts shall be paved with a concrete or bituminous surface. Such areas shall be so graded and drained as to dispose of all surface water accumulation within the area. These requirements shall also apply to open sales lots. Durable and dustless surface may include asphalt, concrete, or other surface (water sealed), as approved by the Engineer. Permitted uses in the Rural district and ER district shall be allowed to surface off- street parking areas with crushed rock and similar durable and dustless surface. Section 8, Subd. 4 (h) states: Maintenance of Off- Street Parking Space. It shall be the joint responsibility of the operator and owner of the principal use, uses and /or buildings to maintain, in a neat and adequate manner, the parking space, accessways, landscaping and required screening. Section 8, Subd. (f) states: When a parking area is for six (6) spaces or more, a curb or fence not over four (4) feet in height shall be erected along the front yard setback line and grass or planting shall occupy the space between the roadway and Page 7 • • • PLANNING & ZONING MEETING NOVEMBER 8, 1989 curb or fence. (The Planning Commission may recommend continuous coniferous planting in lieu of fencing.) See Section 4, Subd. 25 Screening of this Ordinance for further requirements. Professional Opinion: The site and building plan submitted by Paul Wolters should be approved but with some changes and contingent upon a letter -of- credit guaranteeing the work will be completed. In particular: 1. The entire site should be cleaned of all junk, refuse, trash, and junk motor vehicles. 2. The weed covered area adjacent to the well shop should be planted to grass cover. 3. The concrete drive should be extended to the north wall of C and R auto repair and extended to a straight north and south line extending from the "southern corner of the 40x40 accessory building. 4. The area west of the concrete area described in Number 3 should have the gravel and ground asphalt removed, black dirt added, and be planted to grass. 5. The auto salvage operation at C and D should be ended. 6. While the zoning ordinance requires a 40 foot buffer adjacent to a commercial area, the existing C and D building is only 12 feet from the property line. However a 12 foot setback should be maintained as green area and all parking and storage should be removed from the area from the front to rear property line for a distance of 12 feet. Any gravel should be replaced with black dirt and the buffer should be planted to grass. 7. The site plan shows 17 lilacs adjacent to the fence in the rear yard. These should be planted. Size should be 2 gallons. 8. Six additional five foot b and b Black Hills Spruce should be planted in front of the parking lot. 9. Four additional employee parking spaces should be located on the concrete slab adjacent and near the cold storage building. 10. Landscape timbers, parking bumpers, or a concrete curb should delineate the concrete driveway from the green area on the west side of the property. 11. The city's building inspector and/or community Page 8 • PLANNING & ZONING MEETING NOVEMBER 8, 1989 service officer should inspect the property at 60 day intervals prior to the annual CUP review held by the city council on July 1st. 12. An escrow or letter -of- credit should be deposited with the city in the amount of $5,000 to ensure completion of the site improvements outlined here. Mr. Wolters assured the board that C and D auto has moved and so has most of the junk Ron Stahlberg stated that on the north boundary there is a drainage ditch, and asked if there is an easement for the ditch. In the northwest corner Misty Glen Subdivision is planned and when an Industrial zone abuts residential property a 75 foot setback is required. According to the site plan this setback would not be met. The board is also requesting that verification of the property stakes are noted on the site plan. MOTION: Alan Irwin moved to table the Site and Building Plan Review for Paul Wolters, Application #89 -51 until the board is presented with plans that show the right -of -way line of Lake Drive and the possible drainage easement on the north, the pending easements on the west and east line of the property and show easements adjacent to the residential property north of the site and any other easements that are in effect. Mr. Chase seconded the motion and the motion was approved unanimously. CONSIDERATION OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO REZONE FROM RURAL TO LIGHT INDUSTRIAL A CORRIDOR OF LAND NORTH OF MAIN STREET AND EAST OF 20TH AVENUE TO THE CITY LIMITS. Several months ago the Economic Development Commission studied the city's commercial and industrial land use needs. The most visible result of that study was a recommendation to rezone several parcels of land to either a commercial or industrial district. Through the public hearing process some parcels recommended for change were deleted from final consideration mainly because of residential opposition. The immediate result of this was a slight reduction in the total number of acres of these land uses from the recommended total. Since that time however the EDC has continued its discussions of commercial and especially industrial land uses. John Miller feels that it will take 20 or 30 years to develop this land but it will guarantee the city's future as far as employment and tax bases are concerned. The EDC sees some Page 9 • • PLANNING & ZONING MEETING NOVEMBER 8, 1989 urgency in completing the rezoning now to prevent fractionalization of the land into ten acre residential parcels. John Miller stated that guidelines have been determined as to what percentage of land should be zoned for commercial /industrial uses in a city. Mr. Miller explained that now Lino Lakes has approximately three to five per cent of land zoned commercial /industrial. The rule of thumb is to have 10 to 15% commercial /industrial zoned land. The board discussed how they would like to rezone this area. For example, the possibility of zoning the interchange area for retail type uses. Robert King felt that rezoning in this area would give the city a good target area for industrial uses. He felt this is a good area for this type of zoning, being next to the freeway for easy access. Sally Kuether stated that she feels there is a strong need for this type of area. If this area were rezoned it would give the city approximately 12 to 15% of commercial /industrial area, which is within the guidelines. Mr. Irwin felt it would be better to keep the west side of Elmcrest residential so that both sides of the street would be residential and an industrial area would then be off the back yards of those people living on the west side of Elmcrest. Mr. Chase stated that he would rather look at an industrial area from his front yard than off the back yard where families usually spend their time. After considerable discussion a motion was made. MOTION: Mr. Irwin moved to recommend to the City Council approval of a rezone on land in the northeast portion of the City from Rural to Light - Industrial with concern being given to the possibility of a mixed use to be allowed on a portion of the area and consideration being given in making the division line between industrial and residential areas to be along the back line of residential property rather than long the street line so that industrial and residential zones will join along the back property lines instead of the front property lines. Mr. King seconded the motion and the motion was approved with Mr. Chase voting no. Fred Chase stated that he is not opposed to the rezoning, but is against the west side of Elmcrest used as a buffer between residential and industrial areas. Page 10 • • PLANNING & ZONING MEETING NOVEMBER 8, 1989 9:25 p.m. DISCUSSION OF THE GENERAL BUSINESS ZONING OF A PORTION OF THE ELSIE WENZEL PROPERTY LOCATED EAST OF LAKE DRIVE. The board received a copy of a portion of the city's zoning map that shows the Elsie Wenzel property on Lake Drive. The map shows that approximately 125 acres of land has three different zoning classifications. * All of the land west of Lake Drive is zoned R -1 as is some lakeshore land accessible only from Aqua Lane. * A portion of the land south of Aqua Lane and fronting on Lake Drive is zoned GB General Business. Included in this district is some land owned by Bastien Products. * Land north of Aqua Lane and east of Lake Drive is zoned R -4, High Density Residential. Presently the Wenzel land is part of an estate and will probably be sold within the next several months. Bastien Products wanted to expand their business, and brought a site and building plan to the city. To avoid the problem of enlarging and intensifying the non - conforming use rezoning was considered. This led to the problem identified by board members that rezoning of the small Bastien property would be an obvious spot rezoning and an equally obvious illegal action. To avoid this problem a larger area was rezoned to General Business. This zoning continues today. Mr. Miller's recommendation is to eliminate the General Business zoning for all but the actual Bastien land. His reasons were as follows: 1. Current zoning is not compatible with the 1987 comprehensive plan. 2. Plans for a large commercial area have been approved for land near this site, negating the need for additional commercial development in this part of Lino Lakes. 3. The zoning district boundary makes little sense, creating odd- shaped parcels guaranteed to waste land and maximize the "inter- face" between commercial and residential land uses. 4. The land is more marketable for residential land uses especially at higher densities. Page 11 • • • PLANNING & ZONING MEETING NOVEMBER 8, 1989 Sheryl Johnstone, a realtor would like to keep this land zoned General Business. She feels there is a need for more areas like this in the city, and also stated that a residential zone in this area, next to a high density residential zone would not appealing. She felt homes in this area would be hard to sell. Sheryl would like to see a senior citizen housing area developed in the high density residential area. Charles Prokop stated that if this was rezoned then Bastien products would be grandfathered in. He also stated that with an R -4 adjacent to the Wenzel property that a General. Business zone might be appealing next to a senior housing project, allowing shopping nearby. Sally Kuether stated she has a problem with Lake Drive altogether. She would like to see more commercial space along Lake Drive. She would like to see R -1 areas along Lake Drive rezoned to General. Business. Mr. King agreed stating that he would like to see additional businesses next to Bastien rather than residential land. Charles Prokop stated that strip zoning is not desirable. Mr. Miller discussed a citizen survey completed at Maple Grove. He said that residents did not like strip commercial zones. Mr. Chase agreed with Mr. Miller's recommendation. He would like this area zoned R -1. Al Robinson stated that he feels it would be wise to table this issue until the Economic Development Committee is able to review this. Al Robinson also felt he would like to see both sides of Lake Drive zoned to commercial. After further discussion a motion was made. MOTION: Mr. Chase moved to refer this item to the Economic Development Committee for their input and have this item placed on the December Planning and Zoning Board agenda for action. Al Robinson seconded the motion and the motion was approved unanimously. DETERMINE DATE FOR ZONING ORDINANCE WORK SESSION. A work session was scheduled for Saturday, December 9th at 8:30 a.m. A letter will be sent to the boardmembers to remind them of this event. Coffee and rolls will be served. • • PLANNING & ZONING MEETING NOVEMBER 8, 1989 REVIEW OF THE LINO LAKES PROMOTIONAL VIDEO. The board viewed the Lino Lakes Promotional Video and a questionnaire was given to each one of them for their opinion. OLD BUSINESS There was no old business NEW BUSINESS Alan Irwin feels that site plan requirements need to be updated and revised. He wants the applicant to be more prepared, know what easements, and setback requirements are necessary, etc. Chuck Prokop stated that this can be an item to discuss at the worksession set for December 9th. There was considerable discussion about Minor Subdivisions, Preliminary Plats and Metes and Bounds Subdivisions. Many questions were raised such as: 1. What is the difference between a Metes and Bounds Subdivision and a platted subdivision. 2. On Minor and Major Subdivision applications, the words "Metes and Bounds Subdivision" is on all application forms. 3. What makes the city planner decide if this is going to be a Plat or a Major Subdivision? The board felt that the city's planning and zoning applications should be reviewed and possibly reworded. These questions will be addressed to the City Planner for his comments. Mr. Chase moved to adjourn the meeting. Al Robinson seconded the motion. Meeting adjourned 10:22 p.m.