Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-01-1999 PC PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION • CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting December 1, 1999 Mounds View City Hall 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Peterson at 7.00 p.m., December 1, 1999. 2. Roll Call Members Present: Chairperson Peterson, Commissioners Hegland, Johnson, Kaden, Laube, Stevenson, and Miller. Members Absent: Commissioner Berke, with prior notice and Commissioner Braathen (leave of absence.) 111/ Also Present: Planning Associate Jim Ericson, Community Development Director Rick Jopke, Council Liaison Roger Stigney, and Recorder Trish Pearson. Index to Minutes Page Planning Case No. 574-99, 7687 Long Lake Road. Consideration of Resolution 598-99 regarding a request for a Conditional Use Permit for Sunrise United Methodist Church and a Development Review to allow an expansion to the Church facility. Vanman Companies (Representing Sunrise), Applicant. 2 Consideration of Resolution 599-99 regarding TOLD proposal for a Walgreens on the Videen property and the adjacent City Remnant Parcel. 4 Special Planning Case No. SP-074-99, Discuss revisions to proposed Ordinance 642, an ordinance amending the Zoning Code related to driveway widths and curb cuts. 10 Staff Reports/Items of Information 11 Chairperson and Planning Commissioners Reports 11 • Mounds View Planning Commission December 1, 1999 Regular Meeting Page 2 3. Citizens' Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda There were no citizen requests or comments on items not on the agenda. 4. Approval of Minutes A. November 3, 1999 MOTION/SECOND: Stevenson/Miller to approve the November 3, 1999 meeting minutes as corrected. Ayes—7 Nays—0 The motion carried. 5. Planning Case No. 574-99 Property Involved: 7687 Long Lake Road Consideration of Resolution 598-99 regarding a request for a Conditional Use Permit for Sunrise United Methodist Church and a Development Review to allow an expansion to the Church facility. Applicant: Vanman Companies (Representing Sunrise) The applicant was present. Planning Associate Ericson gave the staff report as follows: The applicant, Vanman Companies, representing the property owner, Sunrise United Methodist Church, is requesting approval of a conditional use permit and development review to allow for the expansion of their Church facility located at 7687 Long Lake Road. The expanded areas will serve as additional space within the sanctuary and child care areas, will provide for office space for the pastor and other church workers, and will add a meeting room and multi-use space for the staff and congregation. Planning Associate Ericson stated the total area of the expansion plan is approximately 7,500 square feet, which brings the total building area, after expansion, to approximately 20,500 square feet. He indicated the criteria for approving a conditional use permit for this proposal are all met, as are the dimensional requirements for the development review. He noted an issue brought forward at the previous meeting, with regard to the parking lot setback two feet from Long Lake Road, which was determined at that meeting to simply be non-conforming. He added that as the applicant was not proposing any alterations to the parking lot at this time, the issue would not be saddressed with the overall development review or the conditional use permit. Mounds View Planning Commission December 1, 1999 Regular Meeting Page 3 Planning Associate Ericson stated the resolution before the Planning Commission recommends approval of the conditional use permit and the development review for this site, with stipulations. He stated the first stipulation indicates "The design and character of the expanded areas shall match and compliment the existing architecture of the Church," and the applicant plans to proceed in this manner. The second stipulation indicates "The existing non-conforming parking lot setback shall be allowed to persist until such time that the parking lot is reconstructed or resurfaced and the non-conformity can be corrected." Commissioner Miller inquired if the word "remain" or "exist" would be more appropriate than the word "persist." Planning Associate Ericson stated this was the intent, and the language could be amended to indicate"...shall be allowed to remain." Planning Associate Ericson stated the third stipulation indicates "Two additional parking stalls shall be marked and posted as "handicapped" to comply with ADA requirements." He advised there are currently two such parking stalls on the site. The fourth stipulation indicates "The applicant shall be responsible for recording the City Council resolution of approval with Ramsey County within 60 days of final approval," which is a standard stipulation with any conditional use permit. Planning Associate Ericson stated there appear to be no unresolved issues with this proposal. He indicated there is a wetland on the site, however, the expansion development area will not encroach into the 100-foot wetland buffer zone. He explained that the existing parking space is adequate to meet the requirements for this use, even in light of the additional space that will be added with the expansion. He stated in staff's perspective, this request warrants a recommendation of approval. Commissioner Miller noted the dimensional requirements listed on Page 2 of the Staff Report, which indicates the parking lot setback (north), at 5 feet, required, and 80 feet, proposed. She inquired if this represents the setback from the street, although there is a structure between the street and the parking lot. Planning Associate Ericson indicated that a portion of the parking lot is located between the two buildings, and the measurement was taken from this point. Commissioner Miller stated the first paragraph, last sentence, on Page 4 of the resolution indicates "...it is not anticipated that the use will not cause...,"and requested the second word "not" be omitted. Planning Associate Ericson stated staff would make this correction. Commissioner Stevenson noted the resolution indicates Planning Case 574-99, however, the Staff Report refers to Planning Cases 574-99 and 575-99. He requested clarification. 110 Mounds View Planning Commission December 1, 1999 Regular Meeting Page 4 • Planning Associate Ericson explained that for filing and tracking purposes, each individual action is assigned a tracking number, which is the Planning Case number. He commented that in the past, staff has not included all of the Planning Case numbers on the resolutions, however, this would be done in the future, to provide clarification. MOTION/SECOND: Stevenson/Laube. To Approve Mounds View Planning Commission Resolution No. 598-99, a Resolution Recommending Approval of a Conditional Use Permit and Development Review Request for Sunrise United Methodist Church Located at 7687 Long Lake Road; as Amended to Indicate Planning Case Nos. 574-99 and 575-99. Ayes— 7 Nays—0 Motion carried. Planning Associate Ericson stated a public hearing has been scheduled for this item at the December 13, 1999 City Council meeting. 6. Consideration of Resolution 599-99 regarding TOLD proposal for a Walgreens on the Videen property and the adjacent City Remnant Parcel. Community Development Director Jopke stated, at the Planning Commission's meeting on November 17, there was a presentation and discussion of TOLD Development Company's • proposal regarding the remnant piece of property created by the realignment of Edgewood Drive, and the adjacent parcel that is privately owned by Robert Videen. He indicated at that meeting, the Planning Commission directed staff to prepare a resolution in favor of the concept and the proposed land swap. Community Development Director Jopke stated staff has attempted to compile the comments of the Planning Commission into draft Resolution 599-99, which indicates eleven findings, as follows: 1. The proposed retail/restaurant/clinic land uses, if designed properly, are compatible with surrounding land uses. TOLD has indicated a willingness to design the structures and use building materials which are consistent with adjacent buildings. 2. The proposed development is isolated from residential uses. 3. The proposed land use is consistent with the future land use designation of the site as shown in the draft comprehensive plan currently being reviewed by the Planning Commission. 4. The proposed use is consistent with the current zoning of the Videen property. Rezoning of the city remnant parcel would be required. 5. TOLD is willing to relocate the stormwater holding pond on the remnant parcel at their expense. 6. TOLD is willing to trade approximately 7.4 acres of land for approximately 1.5 • acres of land. The City could use the 7.4 acres of land to protect the exiting Mounds View Planning Commission December 1, 1999 Regular Meeting Page 5 410 wetland, to provide additional recreational opportunities, and to provide stormwater improvements. 7. TOLD is willing to contribute towards the cost of recreational improvements on the 7.4 acre parcel 8. TOLD will attempt to have the existing billboard removed. 9. The Park and Recreation Commission has indicated general support of the TOLD proposal. 10. The TOLD proposal is the best that has been presented and the developer is willing to work with the city to address all issues. 11. The Planning Commission is concerned that the proposal could result in additional city maintenance expenses. Community Development Director Jopke stated the resolution further indicates "NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission supports the TOLD concept and would support the proposed land swap. Approval of any specific development proposal should be through the normal city development review process after any required public hearings are held. The Planning Commission reserves the right to make additional specific recommendations through this process." Community Development Director Jopke requested the Planning Commission discuss these • findings, to insure they are correct and clearly indicate the Planning Commission's review. He stated staff recommends approval of Resolution 599-99. Chair Peterson suggested Finding No. 11 might be more appropriately stated with the addition of the word "however," to indicate "The Planning Commission is however concerned..." He explained that the issue of "possible" is somewhat ambiguous, and in his understanding, the source of this finding relates to maintenance of the wetland area. Community Development Director Jopke stated staffs understanding is that the expenses would be related to the maintenance of improvements made by the City. Commissioner Hegland stated his original question was in regard to any expenses the City might incur as a result of the land swap, which they were not aware of at that time. He explained that whether or not those expenses would be restricted to City maintenance, he was uncertain. Commissioner Stevenson indicated the expenses could also be related to improvements to the wetland, due to the land swap. Community Development Director Jopke stated he had envisioned that if the City created a regional stormwater holding pond on the site, there would be maintenance associated with that. He added that if there were recreational improvements, those would require maintenance as well. • Commissioner Stevenson stated it was probably most appropriate to leave the language of this finding general, as the specific expenses are unknown at this time. Mounds View Planning Commission December 1, 1999 Regular Meeting Page 6 Chair Peterson pointed out that this language might create the impression that there are some large costs associated with this project, without an understanding of what they might be. He stated his only concern is that the finding clearly states the intention. Commissioner Miller inquired if the City could incur expenses other than those related to maintenance. Community Development Director Jopke indicated there could be expenses associated with the improvements the City would construct. Commissioner Miller stated therefore, this proposal could result in additional City expenses, and not specifically maintenance expenses, as currently indicated in Finding No. 11. Commissioner Stevenson pointed out that several other findings refer to potential additional expenses that would be incurred by the developer rather than the City. He stated the Commission was attempting to insure that the City was not entering into an expensive land swap agreement, and that this is clearly indicated. Commissioner Johnson noted discussion at the previous meeting regarding the developer's responsibility for the cost of the survey. Community Development Director Jopke stated there was discussion regarding the platting of the property, and the developer had indicated they were 4110 willing to share in those costs. Commissioner Johnson stated the City would be required to pay for holding pond maintenance, whether for a regional holding pond, or the existing small pond, and inquired what additional expense could be incurred in this regard. Community Development Director explained that if there are larger stormwater issues in the area, that are not addressed by the existing small pond, this would result in additional expenses. He advised that the language of the resolution indicates the developer will relocate the small existing pond, however, this does not address the issue of regional ponding, which may be required of the City. Chair Peterson noted a similar situation several years prior, regarding the Greenfield Development, which involved a land swap. He stated two drainage ponds were created, and there was some concern regarding the City's cost to maintain those ponds, however, he was not aware that any large expense was incurred. Commissioner Kaden stated the Department of Public Works would likely have information that would assist in defining the expenses involved in maintaining the ponds. Commissioner Johnson reiterated that the City would maintain one pond regardless, and he did not believe one pond would cost more to maintain than another one. Chair Peterson added that 1111 this would be true even if the pond covers a larger area. Mounds View Planning Commission December 1, 1999 Regular Meeting Page 7 . Commissioner Johnson advised that some of the ponds require to be pumped out during periods of heavy rain, however, this would be the only expense he could foresee. Chair Peterson explained that this was true of some of the smaller ponds with no exits. Chair Peterson inquired regarding the most appropriate wording for Finding No. 11. Community Development Director Jopke suggested that rather than more specific, the language be more general, indicating that the Planning Commission desires to insure that this land swap does not result in additional costs to the City. Chair Peterson stated this re-wording appears to be appropriate. Commissioner Miller agreed. Commissioner Stevenson stated clarification of this language is for the benefit of the public, who would be concerned regarding additional expenses. He indicated this more general language appears to reflect the intention of the Planning Commission more closely. Commissioner Kaden agreed. Commissioner Kaden inquired if the City would see a financial benefit with the proposed land swap, in addition to obtaining the wetland, or if this was to be determined by the Council, at a later date. 4110 Community Development Director Jopke stated ultimately, this would be the City Council's decision, however, as proposed, it is a straight land swap. He explained that the City would be giving up 1.5 acres, and gaining 7.4 acres in return. Commissioner Kaden regarding inquired din the assessed value of both properties involved in the q g g proposed land swap. Community Development Director Jopke stated he was uncertain. Commissioner Hegland stated the Commission could not be certain at this point, whether or not the City will incur any significant additional expenses due to the land swap, therefore, he would request language to address this. He explained that his concern is that as the matter proceeds, and the Council rules on it, they consider this factor. Commissioner Stevenson inquired if Commissioner Hegland agreed with the suggested re- wording. Commissioner Hegland stated the suggested language does not appear to raise any concern at all, and he was not certain he felt comfortable with this. Chair Peterson advised that this is a preliminary stage in the proposal, and the Commission is considering the "big picture" issues at this point. He indicated that many small issues will come forward, however, at this point, the Commission should identify all of the large issues and incorporate them into the resolution, to provide some feedback to the Council in terms of the direction of this proposal. Mounds View Planning Commission December 1, 1999 Regular Meeting Page 8 • Commissioner Laube stated he felt the suggested language appears to be appropriate for this stage of the consideration. He indicated the Commission desires to inform the Council that there could be a cost, and request that the Council review this. Commissioner Kaden stated the language in the resolution indicates "NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission supports the TOLD concept, and would support the proposed land swap," and inquired if this statement could be amended. He commented that he supports the concept, however, this language appears to indicate he also supports the land swap, and he is not certain that he does. He explained that he had inquired regarding the assessed value of the properties because if the City stands to lose with this proposal, he would not support such a thing, and at this time, there is no way to be certain in this regard. He advised that the piece of land along Highway 10 might be more valuable than the other property, and he would like to know whether or not this is the case. Chair Peterson suggested the omission of the words "would support" in front of the words "the proposed land swap" would make this statement more general in nature. Commissioner Kaden pointed out that this statement would still indicate that the Planning Commission supports both the concept and the proposed land swap. Chair Peterson explained however, the statement would relate to both items, rather than to each item separately, which • would serve to dilute the element of support. Terry Moses of Prudential Commercial Realty, representative of the property owner suggested the Commission consider the triangular portion of land that is owned by the City to be a pond, as that is what it is. He explained that as long as the pond is there, this land can not be utilized for very much else. He pointed out that if the City did wish to utilize the land for something else, the pond would have to be relocated, as ponding is required. He stated this land does not present a substantial amount of land value as it currently exists. Mr. Moses advised that with this proposal, the City will still have the pond, however, it will be relocated at no cost to the City, and in addition, the City will gain 7.4 acres of land. He commented it would be difficult to imagine a scenario in which that land could be utilized in any other way, and for the City to continue to provide the ponding that is required. He explained that if this portion of land were rectangular, with similar square footage, it might be buildable, however, a triangular shape is very difficult to build upon, therefore, the land could not demand a very good price. He stated that the ponding is required to exist on this piece of property, with the exception of the proposed swap. Mr. Moses stated he considers the language in the proposed resolution to be a very general introduction to the process, and he views Finding No. 11 as a cautionary statement, which indicates that the City should be aware that there may be some associated costs that should be researched. He suggested the language be modified to indicate "unacceptable costs" rather than "substantial costs," as `substantial' can be defined differently by each individual, however, `unacceptable' depends upon the situation. Mounds View Planning Commission December 1, 1999 Regular Meeting Page 9 he• agreed with Mr. Moses in regard to the and and the value of Commissioner Johnson stated g pond, the property, in light of the requirement of a pond. He advised that the pond could not be relocated unless the City owned the property adjacent to it. He stated he also believes the City will be benefiting with the land swap, in terms of gaining better wetlands, and may even be able to obtain wetland credits. He stated the City property is comprised of approximately 1.5 acres of dry land, and inquired what percentage of Mr. Videen's property is dry land. Mr. Moses stated the entire Videen parcel is approximately 9.4 acres in size, and of that, approximately 50 percent is wetland, and 50 percent is dry. Commissioner Johnson inquired what percentage of the 7.4 acres the City will gain is dry land. Mr. Moses stated approximately 1.5 acres of dry land will be used for the proposed development, combined with the City's 1.5 acres, therefore, the City will gain slightly more than 3 acres of dry land. Commissioner Miller inquired if the wording of Finding No. 11 should be amended to indicate "unacceptable costs." Commissioner Hegland requested clarification of the proposed re-wording of Finding No. 11. . Community Development Director Jopke stated the language would indicate "The land swap should not result in unacceptable costs to the City." He suggested the addition of language, which further indicates 'The City Council should look at the total costs of the land swap." Commissioner Hegland advised that this language should indicate "The Planning Commission does not believe the City will incur any unacceptable costs with this proposal," as they were uncertain regarding the potential expenses at this time. Commissioner Hegland commented that the issue of re-platting appears to be addressed in this statement as well. Community Development Director Jopke inquired if the Planning Commission desired to omit the words "would support" from the first sentence on Page 2 of the resolution. Commissioner Miller advised the words "would support" did not appear to be necessary, as the language already indicates the Planning Commission supports the TOLD concept and the proposed land swap. She requested further clarification of the proposed re-wording of Finding No. 11. Community Development Director Jopke stated the language is proposed to indicate "At this time, the Planning Commission does not believe that the land swap would result in unacceptable costs to the City. The City Council should look at the total costs of the land swap." MOTION/SECOND: Stevenson/Laube. To Approve Mounds View Planning Commission Resolution No. 599-99, a Resolution Supporting TOLD Development Concept and Proposed Mounds View Planning Commission December 1, 1999 Regular Meeting Page 10 Land Swap, as Amended to Indicate that the Language of Finding No. 11 be Modified to State "At this time, the Planning Commission does not believe the City will incur any unacceptable costs with this proposal. The City Council should look at the total costs of the land swap," and To Omit the Words "would support" from Page 2, First Paragraph, First Sentence. Ayes— 7 Nays—0 The motion carried. Community Development Director Jopke stated staff will present the Planning Commission and Park and Recreation Commission recommendations to the City Council at the December 13, 1999 City Council meeting. 7. Special Planning Case No. SP-074-88 Discuss revisions to proposed Ordinance 642, an ordinance amending the Zoning Code related to driveway widths and curb cuts. Planning Associate Ericson stated proposed Ordinance 642 pertains to the revision of sections of the Zoning Code related to driveway widths and curb cuts. He stated the Planning Commission has discussed this matter at four previous meetings, and at their last meeting, directed staff that with the incorporation of the information brought forward at that meeting, the ordinance would be in a form appropriate to bring forward to the City Council. Planning Associate Ericson stated staff has amended the ordinance, as per the direction of the Planning Commission at the previous meeting, and has prepared Resolution 600-99, which recommends to the City Council adoption of Ordinance 642. Commissioner Johnson noted that the RO Zoning District has been included in the ordinance. Planning Associate Ericson stated staff has made this correction, and has included the appropriate curb cut for the RO Zoning District. Commissioner Stevenson requested clarification regarding how the matter will proceed from this point. Planning Associate Ericson stated a public hearing has been set at the December 13, 1999 City Council meeting for the first reading of the ordinance. He advised that the ordinance will require two readings before the Council, and will receive final adoption at the first regular City Council meeting in January. MOTION/SECOND: Laube/Miller. To Approve Planning Commission Resolution No. 600-99, a Resolution Recommending Approval of Proposed Ordinance 642, and Ordinance Amending Title 1100, Chapters 1104, 1107, and 1121 Regarding Curb Cuts and Driveway Widths; Special • Planning Case SP-074-99. Mounds View Planning Commission December 1, 1999 Regular Meeting Page 11 Ayes—7 Nays—0 The motion carried. 8. Staff Reports/Items of Information A. Previous Council Actions Community Development Director Jopke stated at the November 22, City Council Meeting, the hearing dates for Sunrise United Methodist and Ordinance 642 were set. He stated the Council gave first reading approval, pending further discussion at the upcoming Council Work Session, of Ordinance 644, related to billboards. Community Development Director Jopke indicated staff provided the Council with an update regarding the filling of the two vacant positions in the Community Development Department. He indicated that Jeremiah Anderson has accepted the Housing/Code Enforcement Inspector position, and will begin on December 8, and Aaron Parrish will be the new Economic Development Coordinator, with a start date of December 15. He stated staff was looking forward to having these individuals on board. 9. Chairperson and Planning Commissioners Report No reports were considered. 10. Adjournment There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Peterson adjourned the meeting at 7:46 p.m. (The meeting immediately adjourned to the Agenda Session) Respectfully submitted, Rick Jopke Community Development Director Transcribed by: Trish Pearson TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. OPlanning Comm. Mtg Date: / ( - Please Sign In ! Name Address Phone # Item of Interest: 6 '33- S7 ''o L c(° y, • • MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 598-99 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW REQUEST FOR SUNRISE UNITED METHODIST CHURCH LOCATED AT 7687 LONG LAKE ROAD; PLANNING CASE NO. 574-99. WHEREAS, Vanman Companies, representing Sunrise United Methodist Church, has applied for a conditional use permit and development review to expand the Church facility located at 7687 Long Lake Road; and, WHEREAS, the subject property is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, is designated as a "Church" use on the Comprehensive Plan and is legally described as follows: The west 388.5 feet of that part of the NW %of the NW %of Section 8, Township 30, Range 23, lying North of the North Line of the South 15 acres thereof.subject to County Road I and Long Lake Road. WHEREAS, according to Section 1006.06 of the Mounds View Municipal Code, any new construction or expansion of existing facilities requires the approval of a development review; and, WHEREAS, according to Section 1106.04 of the Mounds View Zoning Code, churches and other institutional-type uses require a conditional use permit to operate within the R-1 zoning district; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents regarding this proposal: a. Planning Application b. Zoning Map c. Location Map d. Site Plan, date-stamped 10/29/99 e. Floor Plan and Elevations, date-stamped 10/29/99 f. Staff Report WHEREAS, the dimensional requirements associated with this use are all met, with the exception of an existing two-foot non-conforming parking lot setback adjacent to Long Lake Road; and, • • Planning Commission Resolution 598-99 December 1, 1999 Page 2 • WHEREAS, The Mounds View Planning Commission acknowledges the presence of wetlands on the Church property yet finds that the areas of building expansion fall outside of the 100-foot buffer surrounding the wetland; and, WHEREAS, the site plans date-stamped 10/29/99 indicate that the existing Church area of 13,000 square feet will be increased by approximately 7,500 square feet for a total build-out area of 20,500 square feet; and, WHEREAS, according to said plans, the seating capacity of the worship area will increase from 275 to accommodate 368 people; and, WHEREAS, there are 98 parking stalls presently available on the site which,according to Section 1121.13 of the Mounds View Zoning Code, exceeds the minimum number of stalls required to be provided for 368 seats; and, WHEREAS, The Mounds View Planning Commission has considered the specific criteria for Churches and other institutional use facilities as they appear in Section 1106.04, Subdivision 1 and finds that they are met; and, 111 WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has considered the provisions from Section 1125.01(1)e of the Zoning Code regarding possible adverse effects of the proposed use and makes the following findings: (1) Relationship to Municipal Comprehensive Plan. (2) The geographical area involved. (3) Whether such use will tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed (4) The character of the surrounding area. (5) The demonstrated need for such use. The Comprehensive Plan designates this site as"Church", which is consistent with the R-1 zoning of this site. Sunrise Church,which has existed at this location for more than 40 years,provides a desired service to the residents of the City and neighboring communities. The property is bordered by public streets on its west,north and south boundaries and bordered by medium and high density residential on its east side. The proposed expansion would be in keeping with the existing design and architecture and would not detract from the character of the surrounding area. WHEREAS,The Mounds View Planning Commission makes the following findings that the general criteria for CUP approval in Subdivision-1125.01 (2) have been met: (1) The use will not create an excessive burden on existing parks,schools, streets and other public facilities and utilities which serve or are proposed to serve the area. It is not expected that the expansion of this use will have any impact on parks, schools,streets Planning Commission Resolution 598-99 December 1, 1999 II/ Page 3 and other public facilities and utilities which serve or are proposed to serve the area. (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. The Church property is bordered on three sides by public streets--Long Lake Road to the west, County Road Ito the north and Bronson Drive to the south. To the east, the Church abuts both medium and high density residential properties. These properties are at least one hundred feet away at their nearest point and as far away as 500 feet from the Church. The magnitude of the separation,in staffs opinion,is of a sufficient distance so as to not have any depreciatory effect on the residential properties. (3) The structure and site shall have an appearance that will not have an adverse effect upon adjacent residential properties. The existing Church, given its separation from other uses, fits well in this area and is aesthetically pleasing. As evidence of this, the Church and the architect who designed it received an award in 1967 for architectural excellence from the Minnesota Society of Architects. The expansion will match the appearance and design of the existing structure and 4110 will add to the overall appearance of the community. (4) The use, in the opinion of the City Council, is reasonably related to the overall needs ofthe City and to the existing land use. The fact that the Church has existed in this location for 42 years with a consistent and growing congregation is proof alone that the use satisfies a community need. Its expansion is a direct result of the Church's growing congregation and its desire to be more responsive to its membership. (5) The use is consistent with the purposes of the Zoning Code and the purposes ofthe zoning district in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use. Churches and other institutional uses are conditionally permitted within the R-1,Single-family residential district. (6) The use is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as a "Church" use. Churches and other institutional uses are conditionally permitted within the R-1, Single-family residential district. (7) The use will not cause traffic hazards or congestion. Staff is unaware of any congestion problems on Long Lake Road as a result of the Church's services. The additional traffic generated by the expansion would not add any significant Planning Commission Resolution 598-99 December 1, 1999 Page 4 volume to Long Lake Road, a Ramsey County four lane collector roadway, a street designed to accommodate higher volumes of traffic. Also,the times during which the Church would have its greatest impact upon the street is also a period of relatively low traffic counts. Given these facts, it is not anticipated that use will not cause traffic hazards or congestion. (8) Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and necessary facilities have been or will be provided All of the infrastructure serving this site are installed and provided--no additional infrastructure will be needed to accommodate this use or its expansion. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission, finding that all of the requirements have been met, does hereby recommend that the City Council approve a conditional use permit and development review for the operation and expansion of the Sunrise United Methodist Church as requested by Vanman Companies, with the following stipulations: 1. The design and character of the expanded areas shall match and complement the existing architecture of the Church. e • 2. The existing non-conforming parking lot setback shall be allowed to persist until such time that the parking lot is reconstructed or resurfaced and the non-conformity can be corrected. 3. Two additional parking stalls shall be marked and posted as "handicapped" to comply with ADA requirements. 4. The applicant shall be responsible for recording the City Council resolution of approval with Ramsey County within 60 days of final approval. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission directs Staff to forward this Resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes. Adopted this 1st day of December, 1999. Jerry Peterson, Chairperson ATTEST: • 9f(le— Rick Jopke, Co nmunity Development Director (SEAL) N ADATA\GROUPS\COMDEV IDEV CASES\57499\598-99 PC.RES MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 599-99 • CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION SUPPORTING TOLD DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT AND PROPOSED LAND SWAP WHEREAS, the Mounds View City Council has asked the Planning Commission to review the TOLD Development Co. concept for the Videen parcel and city owned remnant parcel; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the TOLD Development Co. (TOLD)proposal and made the following findings: 1. The proposed retail/restaurant/clinic land uses if designed properly are compatible with surrounding land uses. TOLD has indicated a willingness to design the structures and use building materials which are consistent with adjacent buildings. 2. The proposed development is isolated from residential uses. 3. The proposed land use is consistent with the future land use designation of the site as shown in the draft comprehensive plan currently being reviewed by the Planning Commission. 4. The proposed use is consistent with the current zoning of the Videen property. Rezoning of the city remnant parcel would be required. 5. TOLD is willing to relocate the stormwater holding pond on the remnant parcel at their expense. 6. TOLD is willing to trade approximately 7.4 acres of land for approximately 1.5 acres of land. The City could use the 7.4 acres of land to protect the existing wetland, to provide additional recreational opportunities, and to provide stormwater improvements. 7. TOLD is willing to contribute towards the cost of recreational improvements on the 7.4 acre parcel. 8. TOLD will attempt to have the existing billboard removed. 9. The Park and Recreation Commission has indicated general support of the TOLD proposal. 10. The TOLD proposal is the best that has been presented and the developer is willing to work with the city to address all issues. 11. At this time the Planning Commission does not believe that the land swap would result in unacceptable costs to the City. The City Council should look at the total costs of the land swap. • • MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 600-99 • CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE 642,AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 1100, CHAPTERS 1104, 1107 AND 1121 REGARDING CURB CUTS AND DRIVEWAY WIDTHS; SPECIAL PLANNING CASE SP-074-99 WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed proposed Ordinance 642, and ordinance amending Zoning Code Chapters 1104, 1107 and 1121 pertaining to curb cuts and driveway widths; and, WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission after significant discussion believes the proposed ordinance to be in the best interest of the community and is in keeping with the overall spirit and intent of the Mounds View Municipal Code; and, WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission asserts that the proposed ordinance is consistent with the land use goals and policies addressed in the Mounds View Comprehensive 110 t Plan. NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends to the Mounds View City Council adoption of proposed Ordinance 642. BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Planning Commission directs staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes. Adopted this 1st day of December, 1999. PLI/tvv\ Jerry Peterson, Chairperson ATTEST: Rick Jopke, Commu 'ty Development Director (SEAL) N:\DATA\GROUPS\COMDEV\SPECPROJ\SP074-99\600-99PC.RES • 0 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission supports the TOLD concept and the proposed land swap. Approval of any specific development proposal should be through the normal city development review process after any required public hearings are held. The Planning Commission reserves the right to make additional specific recommendations through this process. BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Planning Commission directs staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes. Adopted this 1st day of December, 1999. ti„,t,i 1?:.-e."-v----- Jerry Peterson, Chairperson Attest: Rick Jopke, Commu 'ty Development Director N:\DATA\GROUPS\COMDEV\PLANCOMM\PC TOLD Resolution 12199.doc III