Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-03-2008PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting September 3, 2008 Mounds View City Hall 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Chair Stevenson at 7:00 p.m. September 3, 2008. 2. Roll Call Members Present: Chair Stevenson, Commissioners Cramblit, Gunn, Lang, Meehlhause, and Miller Absent and Excused: Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek Also Present: Community Development Director Roberts and Planning Associate Heller Index to Minutes Page MA2008-001 and PA2008-001 Consideration of a Major Subdivision and Amendment to the Mermaid Planned Unit Development (PUD) to Allow for Retail Uses 2 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update 4 3. Approval of Minutes August 6, 2008 MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Gunn/Commissioner Miller. To approve the Minutes of the August 6, 2008 regular Planning Commission meeting as slightly amended. Ayes — 6 Nays — 0 Motion carried. Mounds View Planning Commission September 3, 2008 Regular Meeting Page 2 4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda None. 5. Planning Cases A. MA2008-001 and PA2008-001 Consideration of a Major Subdivision and Amendment to the "Mermaid" Planned Unit Development (PUD) to Allow for Retail Uses Planning Associate Heller reported the applicants, Charlie and Dan Hall, have applied for a major subdivision to divide off a 1.4 acre parcel from their existing 9.36 acre site for retail use. After the subdivision, the applicant plans to sell this parcel to a developer to build a new retail center. They have also requested an amendment to their current Planned Unit Development (PUD) Agreement to allow retail uses on their site. The current PUD only allows for bowling lanes, hotel, banquet center, night club and lounge and restaurant uses. Planning Associate Heller stated she would first address the major subdivision. She stated the 1998 Comprehensive Plan designated this corner as Regional Commercial PUD and this is not proposed to change in the 2008 comprehensive plan update. The proposed subdivision would be consistent with this designation and is consistent with the goals and policies as specified in the Land Use section of the Comprehensive Plan. Planning Associate Heller indicated the regional storm water pond that was constructed along County Road H handles all the storm water runoff for the Mermaid, along with several others nearby properties. She stated since no additional impervious surface would be added, the current system for drainage should be adequate. Also, when the development review for the new retail center is applied for, the applicant will be required to make application with Rice Creek Watershed District for approval. Planning Associate Heller stated the property has the required perimeter easements around the current Mermaid property already and staff does not believe that adding additional easements along the two new property lines running through the parking lot would be necessary. Planning Associate Heller stated there are no new streets or access drives into the Mermaid site being proposed. She stated with the five new proposed retail spaces, the current accesses to the Mermaid by County Highway 10 and County Road H are adequate to handle the additional traffic. She stated with a subdivision of land, city code states the applicant will be subject to a park dedication fee and this would be determined by City Council. Planning Associate Heller stated that when a new building is constructed, all utilities on the site would need to be located underground and the City Forester would review the new landscaping plan at the time of submittal. Also, there are no wetlands on the site. Planning Associate Heller stated the Mermaid was rezoned in 2000 to PUD. Since 2000, the operations of the Mermaid have slightly changed with the night club being removed, more banquet Mounds View Planning Commission Regular Meeting September 3, 2008 Page 3 facilities added and the addition of an arcade. The main issue with these planning requests is parking and would there be enough. She stated the developer submitted a parking study for the site and this information was included in the Planning Commissioners' packet. She stated the 2000 PUD Agreement required 808 parking stalls and currently the Mermaid only has 760 parking stalls. She stated staff felt the new retail would have somewhat different hours of business compared to the Mermaid so the proposed shared parking should not be an issue. Chair Stevenson stated the parking requirements are an issue but it should not determine if the PUD would be approved and would be reviewed in the development process. Planning Associate Heller reviewed the parking study and discussed the sharing of parking between the uses, but there would still be a loss of 106 parking stalls. She added parking requirements are based solely on the square footage of the buildings and doesn't take into account the overlapping of uses or different business needs and hours on the site. Commissioner Miller stated she was concerned about traffic off of County Highway 10. Planning Associate Heller felt the current accesses to the Mermaid would be adequate. She indicated the County Highway 10 and County Road H intersection is anticipated to be rebuilt within the next year or two. Commissioner Cramblit asked if it was part of the TCAAP restructure. Planning Associate Heller stated she believed so and had heard that it could happen as early as 2009. Community Development Director Roberts stated he anticipates the parking issue would work itself out because it is in the best interest of the business owners to make it work. If suddenly there isn't enough parking it would over flow into adjoining businesses. He felt the retail center would not need more than 40 to 50 parking spaces at one time and the zoning code can not address all of the different business and parking scenarios. Chair Stevenson indicated parking needs may depend on which type of businesses come into the retail area. He added he was impressed with the parking study that was performed and the results. Commissioner Meehlhause stated the Mermaid's parking lots always seem like they are not being used as much as they could be. He also expressed concern about where the park and ride would be relocated. Dan Hall, owner of the Mermaid, stated the park and ride can go anywhere on the site. Currently, it has 40 to 50 cars and uses a portion of the proposed development area. He stated there is also the cross parking agreement with Abbey Carpet. He stated he has researched many other area establishments similar to the Mermaid and their parking amounts are considerably less than what they have. Mounds View Planning Commission Regular Meeting September 3, 2008 Page 4 Planning Associate Heller indicated the parking study numbers included the tent that is on the property during the summer months and added the tent is not taking away any parking stalls nor did the City require any additional parking to be provided on the site when the Interim Use Permit for the tent was approved. MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Gunn /Commissioner Meehlhause. To approve Resolution 894-08, a Resolution Recommending Approval of a Preliminary Plat and an Amendment to the Mermaid PUD Agreement to Allow "Retail" at 2200 County Highway 10 as amended. Ayes —6 Nays — 0 Motion carried. 6. Other Planning Activity A. 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update Community Development Director Roberts stated at the last meeting the Planning Commission chose to compare the four new chapters that were presented to the current chapters of the Comprehensive Plan and asked for any comments or feedback. In addition, there are two more chapters for review. Chair Stevenson instructed staff to keep re -writing the Comprehensive Plan. He found it much easier to read. He added he was impressed with the 2007 and 2008 current data. Community Development Director Roberts stated the figure and page numbers for the tables and charts will be updated at the end once all the chapters are put together. Also, two chapters, public facilities and transportation, have been sent to the City's engineer consultant to work on. Chair Stevenson indicated he would like the Planning Commission to have color copies of the updated Land Use map that is in the report. He asked how often staff is meeting with the Comp Plan Task Force. Community Development Director Roberts stated that he has not met with the task force since he started at Mounds View; and asked the Planning Commissioners their opinion on meeting with the Comp Plan Task Force. Chair Stevenson stated he would like to have the Task Force involved in the final review. Planning Associate Heller stated the document is almost complete and didn't know if it would be too much for the Task Force to review the document as a whole. Commissioner Gunn asked if there was time for the Task Force to review to the entire plan. Mounds View Planning Commission Regular Meeting September 3, 2008 Page 5 Chair Stevenson stated he would like the rest of the Task Force to be on board with the revised Comprehensive Plan. He indicated Task Force members should review the revised plan so they have the opportunity to make comments. Community Development Director Roberts asked if the Task Force should come to a Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Meehlhause suggested giving the Task Force three to four weeks to review the plan and then letting the task force have an opportunity to submit any final comments. He added if there are minimal comments regarding the final plan there wouldn't be a need for the Task Force to come back to a Planning Commission meeting. Planning Associate Heller stated she could contact the Task Force members to see if they are interested in reviewing the plan. Also, she would let the members know that the Planning Commission has reviewed the document. Commissioner Lang suggested giving the Task Force a last chance for giving suggestions or comments. Community Development Director Roberts asked the Commission if there are any elements that they felt were missing in the Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Miller asked if the City Council has the opportunity to add or eliminate information. Community Development Director Roberts stated the City Council could review the document intensely or they may decide to simply approve it as is since the Planning Commission and the Comprehensive Plan Task Force have reviewed it. Commissioner Gunn stated the new document is more relevant to the city now. Community Development Director Roberts stated there are three elements remaining: Economic Development, Public Facilities and Transportation. He stated the six elements that the Planning Commission has received are the most relevant to the Planning Commission. He stated the economic development portion should be coming shortly. Chair Stevenson stated the most important item is the Future Land Use Map and he felt the Planning Commission needs to spend time reviewing this map. Planning Associate Heller stated there have been changes to the Future Land Use map from the last meeting. Community Development Director Roberts encouraged the Planning Commission to give staff comments on the plan anytime. Mounds View Planning Commission Regular Meeting Next Planning Commission Meeting: A. September 17, 2008 B. October 1, 2008 8. Adjournment to Agenda Session September 3, 2008 Page 6 There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the meeting at 8:05 p.m. (The meeting immediately adjourned to the Agenda Session) Respectf ly submitted, Ken Roberts Community Development Director Transcribed by: Barbara Suciu TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.