Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-05-1997 • PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting March 5, 1997 Mounds View City Hall 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Chair Peterson at 7:00 p.m. 2. Roll Call Members present: Commissioners Brooks, Johnston, Obert, Miller, Brasaemle, Stevenson and Chair Peterson. Also Present: Community Development Director Sheldon, Planning Associate Ericson, Council Liaison Koopmeiners and Recording Secretary Benesch. • 3. Approval of Minutes: February 5, 1997 Motion/Second: Stevenson/Miller to approve the minutes of February 5, 1997, as amended. Motion Carried: 7 ayes, 0 nays 4. Citizen Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda There were no resident requests or comments from the floor. Index to Minutes Page Planning Case No. 473-97, Conditional Use Permit for Tammy Bellamy, 2185 Pinewood Drive 2 Planning Case No. 474-97, Minor Subdivision for Carol Hoopingamer, 8233 Groveland Road 3 Planning Case No. 475-97, Development Review and Variance for Benson- Orth Associates (ZEP Mfg.), 8490 Coral Sea Street 4 e. Planning Case No. 476-97, Conditional Use Permit Review for Colonial Village Manufactured Home Park, 2075 Rustad Lane 6 1 r. Mounds View Planning Commission March 5, 1997 Regular Meeting Page 2 5. Planning Case No. 473-97 2185 Pinewood Drive Applicant: Tammy Bellamy Request for a conditional use permit for an oversized garage. The applicant, Tammy Bellamy, was present. Planning Associate Ericson explained that the applicant is requesting a conditional use permit for an oversized garage (28'x45') at 2185 Pinewood Drive. Mr. Ericson informed the Commission that since their last meeting, the City had received comments (letters/ phone calls) regarding this request. Mr. Ericson noted that the Commission had received copies of the two letters received. He indicated that the general feeling expressed in the letters was that the size of the garage in relation to the house may be too large. He stated that according to our Code, all of the requirements had been met, but that the Commission may want to consider how this request fits into the character of the neighborhood. He added that Staff had prepared a resolution recommending approval of this request. The Planning Commission inquired if there is any way that the garage could be made smaller. The applicant, Tammy Bellamy, responded that with all of the vehicles and equipment, they need the garage as big as allowed. The Commission wanted to verify that a repair business would not be conducted from the garage. Mr. Ericson explained that a condition stating that the garage shall not be used for living space or other uses not allowed by the district in which it is located is stated in the resolution. The Commission agreed that the resolution needed to be more specific by stating that no home occupation shall be conducted from the garage. Staff suggested that a condition stating that, "not withstanding allowances in the Zoning Code, the oversized garage shall not be used for a repair business whether or not such use would qualify as a home occupation". The applicant, Ms. Bellamy, asked the Planning Commission whether or not the neighbors, who are concerned about the size of the garage, were informed that it is going to go backward and not sideways? Mr. Ericson responded explaining that the notices did not contain a site plan but that the measurements of the garage were contained in the meeting notice. S • Mounds View Planning Commission March 5, 1997 Regular Meeting Page 3 Motion/Second: Johnston/Brasaemle to adopt Resolution No. 495-97 recommending approval of a conditional use permit to allow an oversized garage for Tammy Bellamy, 2185 Pinewood Drive, Mounds View Planning Case No. 473-97. Commissioner Johnston added that he thought this is a good use of the oversized garage and that he'd rather see the equipment stored inside rather than outside. Motion Carried: 6 ayes, 1 nay (Commissioner Obert voted against the motion because he felt there were some concerns regarding the case that have not been addressed and that the matter needs further discussion). Chair Peterson informed the applicant that the City Council will hold a public hearing and take the final action regarding this request at their March 24, 1997 meeting. 6. Planning Case No. 474-97 • 8344 Groveland Road Applicant: Carol Hoopingamer Request for a minor subdivision (one lot into two). The applicant, Carol Hoopingamer, was present. Planning Associate Ericson explained that the applicant is requesting a minor subdivision, splitting a property that is a through-lot on Groveland Road and Knollwood Drive into two lots. He added that as the Commission had suggested at applicant felt that the way the easements were presented at the last meeting was acceptable. Mr. Ericson read aloud the conditions contained in Resolution No. 494-97. He added that Staff is recommending approval of this request. The Planning Commission raised the issue, as they did at their agenda meeting, whether the requested easements were excessive. Mr. Ericson explained that Staff is requesting the land between the NSP easement and the proposed rear property line be set aside for a drainage and utility easement and the result is a wider than normal easement area of approximately 35 feet along the rear property line for Parcel A. It was decided that since the applicant had indicated that the proposed easement was acceptable, no changes would be made. • Mounds View Planning Commission March 5, 1997 Regular Meeting Page 4 Motion/Second: Stevenson/Brooks to adopt Resolution No. 494-97 recommending approval of a minor subdivision for Carol Hoopingamer, 8344 Groveland Road, Mounds View Planning Case No. 474-97. Motion carried: 6 ayes, 1 nays (Commissioner Johnston voted against the motion because he felt the requested easements were excessive.) Chair Peterson informed the applicant that the City Council would take action regarding this item at their March 24, 1997 meeting. 7. Planning Case No. 475-97 8490 Coral Sea Street Applicant: Benson-Orth & Associates (on behalf of ZEP Manufacturing) Request for a development review and variance for an office/warehouse building. • The applicant, Mike Monson, representing Benson-Orth & Associates, was present. Planning Associate Ericson explained that the applicant is requesting a development review and parking variance for an office/warehouse building. Mr. Ericson informed the Commission that upon review of this application by the City Engineer, Short-Elliott-Hendrickson, and the Rice Creek Watershed District, they have determined that in addition to the wetland that was delineated on the site plan that was provided to the Planning Commission, there was an additional wetland located in the northeast section of the lot. A site plan was provided from SEH showing this newly delineated 7,400 square foot wetland. The Planning Commission discussed alternatives for dealing with the wetland issue. Community Development Director Sheldon noted that the applicant would need to obtain a wetland alteration permit from the City Council. She added that, in this case, it was fortunate that the site has several different ways in which to deal with this wetland issue (i.e., enlarging the pond, enlarging the wetland, getting credit for woodland area). She didn't think there would be a problem in finding a way to resolve it. Chair Peterson inquired as to whether or not soil samples were taken and wondered, in terms of the alternatives Director Sheldon mentioned, what would be . the minimal changes needed to the site plan to meet all the requirements for mitigation. Planning Associate Ericson explained that the site plan could be left as it is with paving placed over the wetland if it is determined unavoidable. The • Mounds View Planning Commission March 5, 1997 Regular Meeting Page 5 applicant would need to obtain an amended permit from Rice Creek Watershed District and provide mitigation. The applicant, Mike Monson of Benson-Orth & Associates, addressed the Planning Commission informing them that soil borings had been taken at the site and there was a boring taken very close to the newly discovered wetland which indicated that the soil there was almost identical to the other six borings taken on the site. He added that they would like to move forward with the project and would do whatever necessary to mitigate the wetland and would work with City Staff to take care of it. He added that they had taken steps to position the building and parking lot on the site so that as many trees as possible could be preserved. Planning Associate Ericson read aloud the contingencies and additional approvals required in proposed Resolution No. 496-97, which would approve the variance in parking ratios. It was clarified by Staff that any changes in use of the building in the future would • require City Council approval, and parking requirements would be recalculated based on the new uses. Planning Commissioner Brasaemle expressed his support for this type of approach in which reduced parking ratios are allowed and areas are reserved for parking if needed in the future because it reduces paving and saves trees. Motion/Second: Brasaemle/Obert to approve Resolution No. 499-97 as amended approving a variance in parking ratios for ZEP Manufacturing proposed at 8490 Coral Sea Street; Mounds View Planning Case No. 475-97. Chair Peterson and Commissioner Johnston also expressed their agreement with not paving the entire area, keeping it in reserve for additional parking area if needed in the future and saving trees. Motion Carried: 7 ayes, 0 nays Discussion continued regarding the location of the proposed building with regard to the wetland areas and what alternatives are available. Motion/Second: Stevenson/Brasaemle to adopt Resolution No. 496-97 recommending • approval of a development review for ZEP Manufacturing proposed at 8490 Coral Sea Street; Mounds View Planning Case No. 475-97. SMounds View Planning Commission March 5, 1997 Regular Meeting Page 6 Motion Carried: 7 ayes, 0 nays Chair Peterson informed the applicant that the variance had been granted; however, the development review would go before the City Council at their March 24, 1997, meeting. 8. Planning Case No. 476-97 2075 Rustad Lane Applicant: Colonial Village Manufactured Home Park Review of A Previously Approved Conditional Use Permit for On-Site Mobile Home Sales. At the request of a resident, an interpreter for the hearing impaired was piasant for this item. • Carol Mueller and Gary Pearson, representing the applicant, Colonial Village Manufactured Home Park, were present. Planning Associate Ericson explained that the City is reviewing the conditional use permit that was previously granted in 1995 for Colonial Village Manufactured Home Park for the on-site sales of mobile homes. He reminded the Commission that the contingencies of this permit were discussed at their last meeting. Five of the six contingencies have been met, with the exception being that the model homes be installed in accordance with all applicable City and State Codes pertaining to mobile homes. He informed the Commission that a site inspection by the City's Building Inspector determined that the secondary stairs that had been missing had been added. However, he also determined that there was a problem with the primary stairs (i.e., risers, width of stairs, and handrail). Mr. Ericson added that Staffs recommendation was that the conditional use permit be renewed with the additional Code requirements being met (i.e. stairways and entrance platforms for the primary entrances) be brought into compliance with the Building Code by June 1, 1997. Commissioner Johnston announced that he lives in Colonial Village Manufactured Home Park and felt that he should not participate in the discussion regarding this item. Mr. Ericson informed the Commission that he had received comments and 111 concerns from park residents. Mr. Gary Pearson, Director of the Park and Sales for Colonial Village, indicated that he would-address the concerns of the Planning • Mounds View Planning Commission March 5, 1997 Regular Meeting Page 7 Commission. He expressed to the Commission that they are committed to having a fine community of which they, as well as the City, could be proud. He indicated that they do not have a policy such as existed years ago to get rid of homes simply because they are older. He added that all of the homes displaced at this point were owned by people who came to the Park management requesting that the Park purchase their homes. Mr. Pearson continued by informing thf. Commissions that a list of standards published by the Park are provided to all tenants of the Park and explained that the homes they offer for sale are totally set up, utility lines are installed, and that they are ready for occupancy. He added that the concern with the step width and handrail is a recent change and indicated that up until now, there had been no UBC concern with the steps. He added that if a strict interpretation of the Building Code is enforced, they would comply with it and have the steps built. Commissioner Stevenson asked Mr. Pearson if there have been any changes made in the standards by the Park since the original conditional use permit was granted by the City Council. Mr. Pearson replied that no, there had not been. Chair Peterson inquired as to whether or not they have been enforced more vigorously over the past couple of years. Mr. Pearson replied that he is not in a position to judge that since he had just taken over the property last year, but did indicate that they have made more of an attempt to inform the residents of the standards. Dave Frego, 5734 Squire Lane, addressed the Planning Commission explaining that with the newer homes coming in he is concerned with the resale of his home and wondered if he could receive a statement from the Park in writing that even though his home is older (1975), he would not be forced to move it out of the Park. He added that this a concern that he has been hearing from many of the Park residents. Mr. Pearson recited a section of the State Statutes that indicated that the age of a home cannot be used to terminate a lease with a mobile home owner. Mr. Frego asked that he be given a copy of this section of the State Statute and also that it possibly be distributed to the residents. (A copy was provided to Mr. Frego by Staff.) Tom Elliot, 5737 Bunker Hill Drive, inquired if he could build a fence between his home and his neighbor's home to prevent children from running across his property. Mr. Pearson explained that a building permit process must be followed and that he would also need to check with the City about requirements. He added that fencing is not normally used. Carol Mueller, Manager of Colonial Village • Mobile Home Park, explained that they have had a lot of success in using • Mounds View Planning Commission March 5, 1997 Regular Meeting Page 8 landscaping to accomplish what the fencing does and indicated that it has been the homeowner's choice to install the landscaping. Commissioner Miller inquired as to why we are introducing a new resolution since we are reviewing a previously approved conditional use permit. It was Planning Commission consensus that recommendation to the City Council roe_ °--r conditional use permit review should be done by motion. Scott Oestreich, 5733 Squire Lane, expressed his concern with the maintenance of the Park (i.e, plowing of the streets). He felt that management is spending too much of their time with the on-site sales. Community Development Director Sheldon informed the Commission that she had received concerns from another manufactured home park, specifically, Town's Edge Terrace, regarding this matter, and believes that more needs to be stated in our Code regarding the plowing and maintenance of private streets. Mr. Pearson addressed this concern oxpiainir some problems that maintenance personnel have had with equipment and also indicated that he believes the streets, as they are, are in better condition than most • other streets, but assured Mr. Oestreich that he would talk with maintenance personnel regarding his concern. Tom Elliot, 5737 Bunker Hill Drive, also expressed some concerns with the plowing of the streets in the Park. The Planning Commission agreed that this concern did not relate to the conditional use permit review and the concerns would need to be referred to Park management. Community Development Director asked the Planning Commission if they wanted to review this conditional use permit annually. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that this would be a one time only review as stated in the original conditional use permit and the permit would not be reviewed again unless a violation of the permit occurs. Motion/Second: Stevenson/Brooks to reaffirm the conditional use permit that was granted in 1995 for Colonial Village Manufactured Home Park. Motion carried: 6 ayes, 0 nays, 1 abstention (Commissioner Johnston abstained because he currently lives in Colonial Village.) • • • Mounds View Planning Commission March 5, 1997 Regular Meeting Page 9 9. Planning Commission Bylaws Community Development Director Sheldon reminded the Planning Commission that after their last meeting, there were a number of items that the Commission suggested be modified in the Bylaws. Ms. Sheldon noted each of the revisions and also noted that a new section entitled, "Membership and Vacancies >� The Commission briefly discussed what standards would be used to conduct the meetings. Director Sheldon indicated that she would check with Attorney Bob Long regarding a more relaxed standard that could be used other than Robert's Rules of Order. The Planning Commission continued their discussion regarding each of the revisions to the Bylaws. Motion/Second: Brasaemle/Obert approve Resolution No. 498-97 adopting revised Bylaws for the Planning and Zoning Commission. Motion Carried: 7 ayes, 0 nays 11111 10. Staff Report/Information Items a. The Planning Commission was updated on the Highway 10 Corridor Study (Section 9). Handouts were included in the packet from SRF Consulting. Director Sheldon informed the Commission that the City Council and the EDC would be holding a joint meeting on this study on April 7, 1997, at 6:00 PM and the Planning Commission is welcome to attend. b. The Planning Commissioners were reminded that at the March 17th City Council Work Session, Cathy Bennett and Pam Sheldon will be doing a presentation together on Community Development and Economic Development issues. Again, the Planning Commission was invited to attend. The Planning Commission requested that they be sent a reminder for this meeting. Ms. Sheldon also asked the Commission if there were any items that they would like her to bring up at the meeting and asked them to call her with any suggestions prior to the meeting. Chair Peterson suggested that there be some kind of pro-active approach to development issues instead of reactive. c. Ms. Sheldon asked whether any of the Planning Commissioners wanted to attend a workshop on Land Use Planning in Minnesota called "Beyond the Basics" being given by the Government Training Service. Three Commissioners indicated they wanted to attend on April 10: Jean Miller, 11 Jerry Peterson and Marshall Johnston. { • Mounds View Planning Commission March 5, 1997 Regular Meeting Page 10 d. Ms. Sheldon distributed to the Planning Commission a copy of the Open Meeting Law. 12. Chairperson and Planning Commissioners Reports Members present at the February 19, 1997, meeting included Co illisSiolIers Stevenson, Johnston, Obert, Miller, Brooks, Brasaemle and Chair Peterson. Also present at the meeting were Community Development Director Sheldon and Planning Associate Ericson. Commissioner Stevenson wanted to update the Planning Commission regarding the Bel-Rae financial situation and informed them that he has €rforril� the most recent plan that is proposed for the use of the Bel-Rae (Mr. Stevenson is currently serving on the Bel-Rae task force). • 13. Adjournment There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Peterson adjourned the meeting at 9:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, PttAlk , , Pamela Sheldon Community Development Director • MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 494-97 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A MINOR SUBDIVISION FOR CAROL HOOPINGARNER, 8344 GROVELAND ROAD MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE NO. 474-97 WHEREAS, Ms. Carol Hoopingarner has requested approval for a minor subdivision dividing her property at 8344 Groveland Road, property zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, legally described as follows: THE SOUTH 100 FEET OF THE NORTH 200 FEET OF LOT 43,AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NO. 89, RAMSEY COUNTY, SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS, and THE NORTH 30 FEET OF LOT 1, BLOCK 1, CLARA FORD ADDITION, 1111 SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS WHEREAS, the two lots created by this minor subdivision, Lot A(fronting Groveland Road) and Lot B (fronting Knollwood Drive) can be legally described as follows: Lot A: THE S 100 FT OF THE N 200 FT OF LOT 43,AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NO. 89, RAMSEY CO., EXCEPT THE W 210 FT OF SAID PROPERTY, and THE N 30 FT OF LOT 1, BLK 1, CLARA FORD ADDITION,ALL SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD Lot B: THE W 210 FT OF THE S 100 FT OF THE N 200 FT OF LOT 43,AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NO. 89, RAMSEY CO., SUBJECT TO THE ROAD, EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the applicant's request for a minor subdivision and has determined that it is in conformance with Chapters 1201, 1202, 1104 and 1204 of the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the applicant has submitted a Certificate and Plat of Survey for the above • described property. • MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMIVIISSION RESOLUTION NO. 495-97 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW AN OVERSIZED GARAGE FOR TAMMY BELLAMY, 2185 PINEWOOD DRIVE; MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE NO. 473-97 WHEREAS, Tammy Bellamy has applied for a conditional use permit to construct a 1,260 square foot garage on her property located at 2185 Pinewood Drive, zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, legally described as followed: LOT 32, BLOCK 8, PINEWOOD TERRACE NO. 3 WHEREAS, The Mounds View Zoning Code allows, with a conditional use permit, up to 1,264 square feet of garage/accessory building on one lot; and 1111 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents regarding this proposal: a. Planning Application b. Zoning Map c. Site Plans WHEREAS, the Planning Commission makes the following findings that the dimensional requirements in the Zoning Code have been met: Required Provided Met/Not Met -rage a acs (Front) 70-feet 80-feet Met (Side) 5 feet 11 feet Met (Rear) 5 feet 49 feet Met Percent of Rear Yard <25% 21% Met Garage Width s 35 feet 8 feet Met Area of all Accessory Buildings: s 1,264 Sq. ft. 1,260 Sq. ft. Met WHEREAS, the Planning Commission makes the following findings that possible adverse effects have been considered in its recommendation, as required by Section 1125.01 Subd. 1.e.: 40 Planning Commission Resolution 495-97 March 5, 1997 Page3 • create an appreciable increase in traffic on adjacent streets. The increase in runoff from the larger structure is not significant and will not affect the drainage system. (2) The use will be sufficiently compatible or separated by distance or screening from adjacent residentially zoned or used land so that existing homes will not be depreciated in value and there will be no deterrence to development of vacant land. (3) The structure and site shall have an appearance that will not have an adverse effect upon adjacent residential properties. The placement of the garage so that the bulk of the structure is hidden from street view will provide adequate screening, and will preserve the residential character of the neighborhood. The adjacent neighbors have no objection to the proposal. (4) The use,in the opinion of the City Council,is reasonably related to the overall needs of the City and to the existing land use. (5) The use is consistent with the purposes of the Zoning Code and the purposes of the zoning district in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use. (6) The use is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. • Garages are typical uses in residential areas, and allow for storage of vehicles and other equipment. Having this garage will allow for the property to be kept in better order and for storage of larger-than-typical equipment. Improving neighborhoods by enclosing stored items is beneficial to the community and consistent with community goals. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends approval of the conditional use permit with the following stipulations: 1. The conditional use permit be recorded with Ramsey County within 60 days of City Council approval, and a receipt of such recording shall be provided to the City of Mounds View. 2. The garage shall be designed and maintained to provide a uniform building appearance with the dwelling unit. 3. The garage shall not be used for living space or other uses not allowed by the district in which it is located or by the Zoning Code. Notwithstanding allowances in the Zoning Code, the oversized garage shall not be used for a repair business whether or not such use would qualify as a home occupation. Should the use change for which the permit was granted, the conditional use permit shall become null and void. 4. The garage shall be situated parallel to the home such that it maintains a consistent distance from the side of the home closest to the garage and not be set at an angle. t MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMIVIISSION RESOLUTION NO. 496-97 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FOR ZEP MANUFACTURING, PROPOSED AT 8490 CORAL SEA STREET; MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE NO. 475-97 WHEREAS, Benson-Orth Associates, representing ZEP Manufacturing, has applied for a development review to construct a 22,300 square foot warehouse/office building on the parcel located at 8450 Coral Sea Street, which property is zoned I-1, Light Industrial District and is legally described as follows: LOT 1, BLOCK 1,NORTHSTAR INDUSTRIAL PARK, 2ND ADDITION WHEREAS, Chapter 1006 of the Mounds View Municipal Code requires that a development review be conducted for this and similar projects; and, • WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents regarding this development review request: 1. Planning Application 2. Zoning Map 3. Revised Site Plan, dated 2/28/97 4. Letter from the Applicant WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has made findings that the application from Benson-Orth Associates meets the dimensional requirements as stated below: R quired Provided Met/Not Met Lot Area: 1 acre 3.94 acres Met Building Height: s 45 feet 32 feet Met Building Setbacks Front (Coral Sea St.): 40 feet 120 Feet Met Side (Co. Rd. J): 30 Feet 40 Feet Met Side (interior) 20 Feet 150 Feet Met Rear: 40 feet 210+Feet Met Parking Lot Setbacks Front (Coral Sea St.): 40 Feet 40 feet Met Side (Co. Rd. J): 5 feet 60 Feet Met • Side (interior): 5 Feet 40 Feet Met Parking 87 spaces 43 spaces (1) Planning Commission Resolution No. 496-97 March 5, 1997 Page 3 b. Revise the parking layout to show one additional parking space so that count provided is 43 spaces, with 44 spaces shown in parking areas which could be added if deemed necessary by the City. c. Add a note to the site plan which states: "A variance in required parking ratios was approved for this property by Planning Commission Resolution No. 499-97. The parking ratios approved for this property are as follows: 1 space per 1000 square feet of warehouse space 1 space per 250 square feet of office space The property owner is obligated to build up to an additional 41 parking spaces, which would meet the parking ratios required by the Zoning Code, if deemed necessary by the City based on future parking patterns, use of the building, and evidence that parking needs cannot be satisfied on site. The property owner shall be notified in writing that additional parking must be built, and upon such notice, • shall construct the additional parking within 3 months, with consideration for weather conditions" d. Resolve the situation regarding the minor wetland area in the northeast corner of the site. If the wetland area cannot be moved and/or mitigated, and as a result, major redesign of the parking area and building location is necessary, the site plan shall be resubmitted to the Planning Commission for review and recommendation, prior to forwarding the development review to City Council for action. 3. Prior to obtaining any building permits or grading permits, the applicant shall install snow fences or another type of demarcation device around those areas where trees are to be retained. The area shall be of sufficient width so as to protect the trees' root systems. The use of heavy equipment shall be prohibited in these areas, and the property owner/developer shall be responsible for monitoring construction activities to make certain these restrictions are enforced. • MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 498-97 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION ADOPTING REVISED BYLAWS FOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION WHEREAS, Section 401.06, Subd. 7 of the Mounds View Municipal Code requires the Planning and Zoning Commission to adopt bylaws for its governance and for the transaction of its business, and for the annual review of these bylaws; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has conducted its 1997 review of its bylaws and has determined that revisions are needed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the bylaws for the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be revised as shown in"Exhibit A", attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, and that the bylaws as shown in"Exhibit A" supercede previous adopted versions • of the bylaws. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that these revised bylaws shall be kept on file with the City Clerk-Administrator and the Department of Community Development, and shall be forwarded to the City Council for acceptance. Adopted this 5th day of March, 1997 Jerry P rso Chairman ATTEST: 011Y11\MAL likAU11,1-1 - Pamela Sheldon, Community Development Director (SEAL) N:\DATA\USERS\PAMS\SHARE\PLANCOMM\BYLAW.RES 111 r • City of Mounds View March 5, 1997 Planning and Zoning Commission-Bylaws Page 2 Section IV.B.3. The name of the person recommended for chairperson shall be forwarded to the City Council for action at its first meeting in January. 2. Vice-Chairperson: The Planning Commission shall elect a vice-chairperson each year at its first meeting in January, following the procedure in Section IV.B.3. 3. Election Procedure: For each office,the chairperson shall invite nominations from Planning Commission members. After nominations have been received,the chairperson shall entertain a motion to close nominations. If such motion is made and passed, and more than one nomination has been made,the chairperson shall distribute ballots to the Commission members and each member shall write his or her selection on the ballot. The recording secretary shall tally the ballots and announce the nominee receiving the most votes. In the event of a tie,the recording secretary shall announce the nominees tied in the voting and balloting shall be repeated until an election occurs. If only one nomination has been received,the chairperson may conduct the voting by voice vote. If a majority of the members present vote in the affirmative for the nominee,the nominee shall be elected. 4. Assumption of Duties: The Chairperson and Vice Chairperson shall assume office at the first meeting in February of each year. 5. Term of Office: The chairperson and vice chairperson shall serve one year terms, and may be re-elected to additional terms in accordance with this Section IV.B. C. DUTIES OF OFFICERS: The chairperson shall preside over the meetings of the Planning Commission, and shall have the authority to add or cancel agenda review meetings or regular meetings, and to call special meetings as provided in Section VI. The vice chairperson shall assume the duties of the chairperson, in the absence of the chairperson V. LIAISON TO COUNCIL: The City Council shall appoint from among its members a Liaison to the Commission on an annual basis. It is expected that the Council Liaison will attend the Commission meetings on a regular basis. In the event of the absence of the Council Liaison at a Commission meeting, a Commission member may be appointed by the chairperson to represent the Planning Commission at the next regular City Council meeting or at the meeting where the City Council will be considering the planning cases acted upon by the Planning Commission in the absence of the Council Liaison. W. MEETINGS A. TYPES OF MEETINGS; SCHEDULE: The meetings of the Commission shall be held on the first and third Wednesday of each month,with the annual schedule of meetings for the • following year to be adopted by Resolution at the first meeting in December. 1. Regular Meetings: The first Wednesday of the month shall be a regular business meeting for the purpose of convening public hearings, making recommendations to the • City of Mounds View March 5, 1997 Planning and Zoning Commission-Bylaws Page 4 meeting. Minutes shall be approved by motion. Approved minutes shall be the official record of the business conducted and actions taken by the Planning Commission. Commission members may request copies of approved minutes after they have been corrected, if necessary, and signed as approved. Copies of the approved minutes shall be filed with the City Clerk-Administrator and in the Community Development Department. Minutes shall be clearly marked"UNAPPROVED"or"APPROVED". The minutes shall state the following: 1. type of meeting,whether agenda review,regular, or special 2. date,time and place of the meeting 3. time meeting called to order 4. roll call of members present, and whether absent members are excused or unexcused 5. corrections to and approval of any previous minutes and the vote taken, except that minor grammatical and typographical corrections need not be noted 6. for each planning case on the agenda: a. case number,project name and address,brief description of the request, and name and address of the applicant b. summary of the request c. summary of any previous action • d. summary of the staff review e. summary of statements made by the applicant,particularly concessions or agreements made by the applicant f. summary of comments made by each person testifying,with the name and address of the person noted 7. for any motions made: a. accurate as possible statement of motion b. name of Commission members making and seconding motion c. vote on each motion as to number of ayes,nays and abstentions d. reasons for each nay vote or abstention e. whether motion carried or failed 8 specific concerns addressed to the chairperson for inclusion in the minutes 9. reports by staff 10. reports by Commission chairperson and members 11. if the minutes are for a regular meeting, date,time,place and attendance at the preceding agenda review meeting 12. time of adjournment 13. signature of chairperson and recording secretary 4110 • City of Mounds View March 5, 1997 Planning and Zoning Commission-Bylaws Page 6 residents,property owners, and citizens separate from Commission meetings, communication between Commission members outside the meeting forum, telephone calls or letters which attempt to influence a Commissioner's opinion on a matter which will be subject to the Commissioner's vote. When the Planning Commission is involved in a matter which is to be heard and decided by the Commission(e.g. variances),Planning Commissioners shall indicate to the person contacting them that such contact is inappropriate and all testimony needs to be offered at the hearing to insure a fair hearing for all parties. In all other cases,Planning Commissioners should discourage such contacts and should avoid expressing any opinion as to the merits of the case. When ex parte contacts occur,the Planning Commissioner is responsible for notifying the Community Development Director, and for conveying the substance of the communication at the next commission meeting at which the matter discussed is under consideration. Approved by the Planning Commission by Resolution No. 498-97 Date:March 5, 1997 Jerry Pete&4•n, hairperson ATTEST: kyt(AAA, Aut)At4- Pamela Sheldon, Community Development Director N:\DATA\USERS\PAMS\SHARE\PLANCOMM\PCBYLAWS.97 410 11/ MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 499-97 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE IN PARKING RATIOS FOR ZEP MANUFACTURING,PROPOSED AT 8490 CORAL SEA STREET; MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE NO. 475-97 WHEREAS, Benson-Orth Associates, representing ZEP Manufacturing, has applied for a variance of parking ratios associated with the development of a 22,300 square foot warehouse/office building on the parcel located at 8450 Coral Sea Street, property zoned I-1, Light Industrial District, legally described as follows: LOT 1, BLOCK 1, NORTHSTAR INDUSTRIAL PARK, 2ND ADDITION WHEREAS, Chapter 1121 of the Mounds View Zoning Code establishes the parking ratios by specific use; which, as they relate to this project, are as follows: • Warehouse: 8 spaces plus 1 space for every 500 square feet of warehouse floor area Office: 3 spaces plus 1 space for each 175 square feet of office floor area WHEREAS, according to the Zoning Code, the number of parking spaces that would be required using the square-footages provided by the applicant are as follows: Warehouse: (19,325 square feet) Required spaces=47 (8 spaces plus 39) Office: (5,950 square feet) Required spaces= 37 (3 spaces plus 34) Total: (25,275 square feet) Required spaces= 84 WHEREAS, Staff has reviewed parking ratios used by other municipalities and parking guidelines as developed by the American Planning Association and recommended the following ratios: Warehouse: 1 space per 1,000 square feet warehouse floor area Office: 1 space per 250 square feet of office area WHEREAS, utilizing the adjusted parking ratios, the number of parking spaces required for this development would be 43 spaces; and, WHEREAS, there is sufficient room on the property to provide the 84 spaces required by • the Zoning Code; and, • Planning Commission Resolution No. 499-97 March 5, 1997 Page 3 e. That the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. Economic conditions alone shall not be considered a hardship. The ratios proposed for the project are as follows: one space per 1000 square feet of warehouse area(19 spaces) and one space per 250 square feet of office space(24 spaces). These ratios are consistent with surveys of other jurisdictions and information from the American Planning Association, and represent a suitable adjustment. The conditions on this resolution require that 43 spaces be provided on the site plan. f. The variance would not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this title or to other property in the same zone. The granting of this variance will not conflict with the purpose of this Title in that parking will be provided using accepted parking ratios for office and warehouse uses. Sufficient room is available to build the additional parking required by the ratios in the City Code, if it becomes evident that parking is needed in the future or if a different use locates in this facility. The 12,025 square-foot reduction of impervious surface is an environmental and • aesthetic benefit. g. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. The granting of this variance will be a benefit to neighboring properties by preserving an extensive growth of trees. These trees serve as an additional buffer between the proposed building and adjacent parcels. There are plans in the future to create nature trails and hiking paths in the open area behind the site. Retention of this wooded area will allow for a more opaque screen while retaining the natural character of the site. Traffic will not increase on the adjacent streets as a result of this variance. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission does hereby find that the criteria for granting a variance in this case have been met. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission does hereby approve a variance in the parking ratios applicable to the proposed ZEP Manufacturing project with the following stipulations: 1. The ratios applicable to this property shall be as follows: • Warehouse: 1 space per 1,000 square feet of warehouse floor area Office: 1 space per 250 square feet of office floor area