HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-10-2007
PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Regular Meeting
January 10, 2007
Mounds View City Hall
2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112
______________________________________________________________________________
1. Call to Order
Chair Stevenson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. January 10, 2007.
______________________________________________________________________________
2. Roll Call
Members Present: Chair Stevenson; Commissioners: Cramblit, Gunn, Meehlhause, Miller,
Lang, and Walsh-Kaczmarek
Absent and Excused: None
Also Present: Community Development Director Ericson
________________________________________________________________________
Index to Minutes Page
Planning Case MI2006-002: Consideration of a Minor Subdivision; 4
Applicant: Abiding Savior Lutheran Church; Address: 8211 Red Oak Drive
_______________________________________________________________________
3. Special Order of Business
Chair Stevenson announced there are several new members to the Planning Commission. He
asked each member to introduce him or herself and talk about their Planning Commission
experience.
Commissioner Todd Lang, 2558 Ridge Lane, stated this is his first time serving on a Planning
Commission. He has lived in Mounds View for about two and one half years.
Commissioner Gary Meehlhause, 7400 Parkview Drive, stated this is his third year on the
Planning Commission and has lived in Mounds View since 1984.
Mounds View Planning Commission January 10, 2007
Regular Meeting Page 2
________________________________________________________________________
Commissioner Jean Miller, Hillview Road, stated she has enjoyed being on the Planning
Commission for more than 20 years, seeing what goes on in the City, and contributing to the
community.
Chair Gary Stevenson, Arden Avenue, stated he has lived in Mounds View for 30 years and has
served on the Planning Commission for about 15 years.
Commissioner Sherry Gunn, Red Oak Court, stated she has lived in Mounds View for 19 years
and just finished a four-year term on the Mounds View City Council.
Commissioner Keith Cramblit, Bunker Hill Drive, stated he has lived in Mounds View for six
and one half years and this is his first time serving on a Planning Commission.
Commissioner Mary Kay Walsh-Kaczmarek, 8346 Pleasant View Drive, stated she has lived in
Mounds View for nine years and this is her first time serving on a Planning Commission.
A. Oaths of Office of New Planning Commissioners
Community Development Director Ericson delivered the oath of office to Commissioners
Cramblit, Walsh-Kaczmarek, Gunn, and Lang.
B. Election of Officers – Chair and Vice-Chair
Community Development Director Ericson suggested deferring the Election of Officers until
after the planning case.
Chair Stevenson agreed.
C. Review Planning Commission Bylaws
Community Development Director Ericson suggested deferring the Bylaws review until after the
planning case.
Chair Stevenson agreed and continued the meeting beginning with Item 4.
______________________________________________________________________________
4. Approval of Minutes
December 6, 2006
MOTION/SECOND: Miller/Meehlhause to approve the minutes of the December 6, 2006
regular Planning Commission meeting as slightly amended.
Ayes – 7 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
______________________________________________________________________________
Mounds View Planning Commission January 10, 2007
Regular Meeting Page 3
________________________________________________________________________
5. Citizens Requests and Comments Relating to Planning and Zoning Issues Not
Already Present on the Agenda.
None
______________________________________________________________________________
6. Planning Case MI2006-002: Consideration of a Minor Subdivision; Applicant
Abiding Savior Lutheran Church; Address: 8211 Red Oak Drive
Community Development Director Ericson explained the planning case before the Commission
is for consideration of a minor subdivision for Abiding Savior Lutheran Church, 8211 Red Oak
Drive. He stated the Church owns the property next door located at 8184 Eastwood Road and
would like to split the home and 16,025 square feet from the parcel leaving a flag-shaped lot that
would be absorbed into the Church’s land at the corner of Red Oak Drive and Arden Avenue.
Director Ericson indicated this request is the precursor to a request to create additional land for
use in conjunction with a future major subdivision and 32-unit senior housing cooperative.
Director Ericson indicated the lot is wide enough and deep enough to allow for a subdivision.
He explained subdivisions are usually done perpendicularly or horizontally to the street to allow
for another housing unit. Director Ericson mentioned it is not often a portion of land is split off
the back yard without access to a street, however, when redevelopment opportunities exist or
where land is going to be subdivided by one property owner and combined with another, it is
allowable and that is what is happening in this case. He pointed out the City code that provides
for a subdivision is title 1200 of the code and was provided in the commissioners’ packets.
Director Ericson reported that with this subdivision, potential easements were also looked at. He
stated Staff required easements be granted over the remaining property to make sure there are no
easements on the larger property that need to be vacated; it appears there are not. Director
Ericson mentioned the certificate of survey, title commitment, and the staff report was sent to the
City Attorney for review.
Director Ericson explained that with subdivisions, there is generally a park dedication fee of five
to ten percent of the property value to help offset additional costs to the City Park System for
additional users. He stated this is a way to make sure parks are current and up to date and for
developing communities to dedicate land for parks. Director Ericson explained that since
Mounds View is a fully developed community, the fee is considered a commensurate donation to
the park system. He indicated no park dedication fee would be collected for this subdivision
because at present there would be no increased property density. He stated the park dedication
fee could be revisited should future development occur.
Director Ericson stated that public notification is required for subdivisions, with the exception of
minor subdivisions. He stated the property owner to the south was notified as he is immediately
impacted by the subdivision. Director Ericson explained that if the church did come forward
with a plan for redevelopment, official notification would be required.
Mounds View Planning Commission January 10, 2007
Regular Meeting Page 4
________________________________________________________________________
Director Ericson stated Staff’s review indicates this request satisfies City code except for a shed
that would be moved or removed from the property. He mentioned on the issue of consistency of
the minor subdivision, the overall development of this lot would need to be combined with the
church property or a new subdivision must come forward within a year. Director Ericson
explained the minor subdivision would need to be recorded in Ramsey County and the new
deeds filed to make it official.
Director Ericson stated that what is before the Commission is strictly a request for a minor
subdivision.
Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek asked why the lot was subdivided in the flag shaped manner
with a 10.7-foot frontage.
Director Ericson replied the church wanted to preserve the row of pine trees on the lot.
Commissioner Cramblit asked who currently occupied the home.
Director Ericson replied the church owns the property.
Mr. Jerry Kunz, 8284 Pleasant View Drive, spoke on behalf of the church and reported the house
is currently unoccupied.
Chair Stevenson stated the Planning Commission is charged to not allow lots with less than a
minimum of 75 feet access onto a public roadway, therefore creating dead lots. He stated his
feeling is that because the applicant has one year to submit a plan for the property, it must be
highlighted that this is not a creation of a dead lot and that it would reverted back to the original
configuration if it is not adjoined to the rest of the church property or development has not come
forth. He stated the Planning Commission wants to be up front that it is not the norm to create a
lot that does not conform.
Director Ericson added it is not a conforming lot in a conventional sense nor is it intended to be a
separate buildable lot with access to a roadway. He explained if it were a stand-alone property
with no adjoining neighbors absorbing this property, the Planning Commission or City Council
would not approve it. He explained that subdivisions that create a landlocked lot where there
was future impending development have been approved in the past. He stated that
nonconforming lots have been created with the requirement that it be attached to other property.
Director Ericson explained that in this case the subdivided property from the lot on Eastwood
Road would be attached to the church property.
Commissioner Miller asked if this is explained in the resolution.
Chair Stevenson replied it was and pointed out the comments on page two of the resolution. He
stated that perhaps it should be spelled out further. He said the staff recommendation wording is
Mounds View Planning Commission January 10, 2007
Regular Meeting Page 5
________________________________________________________________________
somewhat better than what is in the resolution. Chair Stevenson asked that the resolution clarify
what the applicant must do within the year to become compliant.
Director Ericson indicated Staff could add a stipulation that the lot in and of itself as created is
not a buildable lot. He stated there is a provision that stipulates it is invalid if the church does
not effectuate it within the year. He stated the deeds could not be sealed until something occurs.
Commissioner Miller asked if anything should be said about the wooden fence.
Director Ericson replied nothing had to be mentioned.
Director Ericson noted this was not published as a hearing; however there are residents in
attendance that may wish to speak to this topic.
Chair Stevenson stated residents may speak if they wish, but currently the Commission is only
looking at the church’s request to split the lot and take the back off the existing lot.
Mr. Jim Sikorski, 8340 Sunnyside Road, stated he lives just south of the proposed property. He
stated his concern relates to what the future plans are for the property. He reported the large
number of senior coop units would cause concern with the people in his area. He stated this is a
low residential zone and that is the way it should stay. He said if there is a plan to upgrade the
subdivision and change the zoning, he has a major complaint with the proposal. He stated some
of the items brought up include the eyesore created by a huge development in a low residential
area, safety concerns in an area with children and increased traffic, a single lane street that would
be a burden with increased traffic flow, parking would be an issue, noise is one of his biggest
concerns, church parking is already an issue and this would make it worse, water and sewer
capacity would be an issue, utility upgrade requirements, storm water runoff, and the increased
need for police and emergency services, he was looking forward to a plan for sidewalks on that
side of the street, and setting a precedence for a low density area. In summary, he stated he does
not have a problem with the subdivision as long as it does not lead to rezoning the property
resulting in an undesirable effect on the neighborhood.
Mr. Alan Smith, 8385 Sunnyside Road, asked if the potential fate of parcel B is that it could be
sold within the year before parcel A is resolved.
Chair Stevenson replied it could be sold and the fate of it would not change if the Planning
Commission were to change the boundaries of parcel B from 100 feet to 90 feet.
Mr. Smith asked if parcel B were sold with the house on it and the church was unable to resolve
the issue with parcel A, would the subdivision revert back to the original configuration.
Chair Stevenson replied if it were sold, parcel B could revert back.
Director Ericson replied, at this point, the property at 8184 Eastwood Road is one large piece of
land with a house on it. He explained that if the church were to sell this property without any
Mounds View Planning Commission January 10, 2007
Regular Meeting Page 6
________________________________________________________________________
action by the City Council or the City stamping the deed, it would not be a valid transaction. He
believes there is some assurance that if the property is sold, it would have had to be effectuated.
Chair Stevenson asked if the church could sell the property during this year.
Director Ericson replied that if the City Council approves this request, and they come forward
with a new deed that combines parcel A with the church property and files it with Ramsey
County, parcel B becomes a parcel onto itself and could be sold.
Mr. Randy Heltzer, 8180 Eastwood Road, stated he lives next door to the property. He
mentioned he has a preliminary sketch of what is planned for this summer. He indicated the lot
they are proposing currently does not conform to the comprehensive plan. He explained the
previous owners explored the option of building a house behind their home and were told they
could not as it was a nonconforming lot. He asked the Planning Commission to tell Abiding
Savior Lutheran Church that this is a nonconforming lot.
Chair Stevenson replied the church has one year to make this a conforming lot, which means
they would have to join it to their property.
Mr. Heltzer stated that when the house is sold and the additional footage is taken from the house,
future owners of the property would not be able to add on to their property.
Chair Stevenson stated there are some tree issues with any changes to that home.
Mr. Charlie Terry, 8385 Eastwood Road, pointed out this is being looked at as just a subdivision.
He compared it to a teenager wanting to buy a car but stating it would not be driven until later.
He commented this cannot be looked at as just a subdivision, but to look at it with the realization
that the senior housing would happen. He stressed this is not the right use for this property.
Ms. Ann Ackerman, 2673 Ardan Avenue, stated this subdivision is a precursor to a change in
zoning to allow a multiple family unit.
Mr. Ken Fletcher, 8330 Sunnyside Road, added his opposition based on everything that has been
brought up. He asked if this is going to be built, what is going to happen 20 years from now
when Augustana has already backed off stating anything less than 60 units is not a viable
investment. He is concerned that low income housing or something worse would be considered.
Chair Stevenson stated when this comes back it would most definitely be a concern.
Mr. Fletcher stated Abiding Savior would sell it to a developer who would sell the units and
Abiding Savior Lutheran Church would be a neighbor rather than it being a church sponsored
development. He believes the entire plan should have been put on the table up front.
Mr. Steve Bakke, 8261 Sunnyside Road, indicated he thinks everyone on the Commission
recognizes that it would make sense to break this down and look at it separately but residents
have pointed out why it should not. He would like to add that it may seem harmless to split off
Mounds View Planning Commission January 10, 2007
Regular Meeting Page 7
________________________________________________________________________
the lot, but if the church sells parcel B and cannot go forward with their plans and are stuck with
Parcel A, they are not going to give it back to who owns parcel B. He stated the church could be
looking at losing money. He believes the ramifications of doing the split now where it would be
hard for the church to back out. He stated there are ramifications that need to be considered
before a vote is taken.
Chair Stevenson replied that this is why the church is given one year to develop the lot; it will
revert to the original configuration.
Director Ericson stated the confusing thing is that the 16,000 square foot property and house
could not be sold without parcel A attached to it because at this point, the lot does not exist and
the deed has not been sealed to it. He explained the deed would not be sealed until something is
resolved. He stated his recommendation is that nothing occurs on this lot until there is some
action by the City Council with any kind of subsequent rezoning, comprehensive plan, or major
subdivision request. He appreciates all the comments and concerns by the residents and realizes
it is difficult for the Planning Commission to consider this request without looking at the future
plans of the church. He stated this may warrant tabling until the next meeting if additional
information is required. He stated that in terms of whether parcel B can be sold separately; only
after something is resolved with regard to this request. He stated it would not be advisable to sell
the property as the house and 16,000 square feet until there is resolution to the request by the
Planning Commission and the City Council. He explained that parcel A does not exist until the
City seals the new deeds and this will not be done until something occurs with the request. He
indicated there are other recommendations in the resolution. He stated the Planning Commission
could table this so there is no action until or in conjunction with other actions that are yet to be
accepted by the City.
Chair Stevenson stated that is the direction he is leaning towards.
Mr. Terry readdressed the Commission and stated this request needs to be looked at further and
to put it off until the complete plan is put forward.
Mr. Sikorski readdressed the Commission and asked what this allows Abiding Savior Lutheran
Church to do other than sell parcel B. He restated it is a precursor to selling the property to a
developer for condominiums or a large development.
Commissioner Lang asked Director Ericson what action would be required by Abiding Savior if
this were to go forward, to take parcel A and add it to the church parcel.
Director Ericson replied it is a paperwork process of a lot combination through Ramsey County,
tying the two properties together for tax purposes. He stated there is Minnesota State Statute
15.99 that requires the City take action within 60 days. He stated Staff could ask the church to
waive the 60-day requirement and bring it back to the next meeting.
Mounds View Planning Commission January 10, 2007
Regular Meeting Page 8
________________________________________________________________________
Mr. Bob Sherry, 8160 Eastwood Road, addressed the property with the house and referenced the
photo on page eight, stating the homeowner would never be able to get to the back of the
property because of the trees.
Chair Stevenson explained there is actually 33 feet to the parking lot from the garage and the
property line would go through the middle of the shed.
Commissioner Meehlhause stated there is another step in the process in that the City Council
must also approve this. He mentioned that whatever the Planning Commission votes is not
necessarily what would happen.
Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek commented that it is possible that by Abiding Savior Lutheran
Church bringing this forward now, it might be to help them with their planning process as to
what their options are financially as well as legally.
Chair Stevenson asked Director Ericson what the Commission’s course of actions are to table
this until a later date and what rational they would have do this.
Director Ericson replied the Planning Commission could direct Staff to speak with the Church
and determine whether it would consider putting off final resolution until it is packaged with the
other requests pending before the City. He stated the Commission could table it until the next
meeting pending the outcome of Staff’s meeting with the Church if it does not to waive its right
to 60 day action.
Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek asked what the benefit would be to table this rather than
denying it.
Director Ericson replied the Planning Commission could deny this request if felt it was
inconsistent with the subdivision code or the comprehensive plan. He explained if that course of
action is taken, it sends a message to the Church of what could be accomplished in the future.
He stated that to deny the request, there must be rational that warrants the denial. He explained
that to deny a request, it must rest on the City Code. He stated that theoretically the fact that it
does not have the necessary frontage on Eastwood Road could be justification for denial.
Commissioner Gunn asked Mr. Kunz why the church is coming forward with the subdivision
without it being connected to the other plans.
Mr. Kunz replied the Church would like to sell the house and cannot do that without the
subdivision. He stated the Church would keep the lot as green space if the development did not
go through.
Commission Gunn asked if the Church would keep it as a separate lot if it did not go through.
Mr. Kunz replied parcel A would be kept as Church property.
Mounds View Planning Commission January 10, 2007
Regular Meeting Page 9
________________________________________________________________________
Chair Stevenson stated that if the Commission never sees anything for building and the intention
is for green space and they would really like to sell parcel B and the rest would be attached to
the church and there was never talk of a hi rise building, he does not see a problem at all. He
indicated it would get property off the church’s tax base and it is a very sellable 16,000 square
foot space, but in the back of his mind, he does not know what their intentions are. Chair
Stevenson indicated he would like to know what the intentions are.
Commissioner Gunn stated this is what the Commission needs from the church in order to make
a better call on this situation. She stated that what Mr. Kunz just said separates it from the future
plans.
Mr. Kunz stated the church has always had their eye on that piece of property next to their
parking lot.
Commissioner Gunn stated the problem is this is not stated in the resolution and the Commission
knows the church is thinking about developing the property. She indicated that there is not
enough information to comfortably make a decision. She stated that even with the one year
stated it is not enough information.
Chair Stevenson entertained a motion to table this with the stipulation that it come back when the
purpose of parcel A and B are stated or parcel A be attached to the current church property. He
would like this tabled until the first Commission meeting in February unless the church agrees to
postpone the 60-day requirement.
Commissioner Miller mentioned that she does not know how far the church has taken their plans
for building.
Chair Stevenson stated this would be part of the development plan, but if the church comes back
and states it would like to add parcel A to the church as green space and sell parcel B as soon as
possible, the Commission would be looking at it differently.
MOTION/SECOND: Cramblit/Gunn, to table Resolution 858-07 a Resolution Recommending
approval of a minor subdivision of 8184 Eastwood Road requested by Abiding Savior Church;
Mounds View Planning Case No. MI06-002.
Ayes – 7 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
______________________________________________________________________________
7. Other Planning Activity
None
______________________________________________________________________________
Community Development Director Ericson asked the Commission to return to Items 3 B and C.
Mounds View Planning Commission January 10, 2007
Regular Meeting Page 10
________________________________________________________________________
3B. Election of Officers – Chair and Vice-Chair - Continued
Chair Stevenson returned the Planning Commission to Item 3B and opened nominations for the
position of Planning Commission Chair.
Commissioner Gunn nominated Chair Stevenson, seconded by Commissioner Meehlhouse.
No other nominations were made and Chair Stevenson called for a vote.
Ayes – 7 Nays – 0 Nomination of Chair Stevenson passes.
Chair Stevenson opened the nominations for Vice Chair by nominating Commissioner Miller for
Vice Chair, seconded by Commissioner Meehlhause.
No other nominations were made and Chair Stevenson called for a vote.
Ayes – 7 Nays – 0 Nomination of Vice Chair Miller passes.
______________________________________________________________________________
3C. Review Planning Commission Bylaws - Continued
Community Development Director Ericson presented the Planning Commission Bylaws stating
they are reviewed on an annual basis at the first regular meeting in February. He indicated that
because there are four new Commissioners this year, Staff thought presenting the Bylaws earlier
than usual would be a good idea.
Director Ericson asked the Commissioners to review the Bylaws and let him know if there are
any questions.
Director Ericson explained Planning Commission meetings are held on the first and third
Wednesdays of the month, however the meetings for January 2007 are held the second and
fourth Wednesdays to accommodate the New Years Holiday.
Director Ericson informed members a quorum exists when four Commissioners attend. He asked
that if you cannot attend a meeting, to please let him or Planning Associate Heller know so they
are aware of it in advance. He stated that on occasion an additional or emergency meeting is
called if there is a lot of Planning Commission activity. He stated that at times meetings are
cancelled if activity is light.
Director Ericson explained packets are mailed or delivered to Planning Commission members
the Friday before the next meeting. He stated if anyone would prefer an emailed copy of the
packets to let him know. Director Ericson asked if there were questions or comments from the
Commission at this time.
Mounds View Planning Commission January 10, 2007
Regular Meeting Page 12
________________________________________________________________________
Community Development Director
Transcribed by:
Dianna Wise
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
January 10, 2007
Page 11
Chair Stevenson commented he has made the same suggestion since 2004, and will do so again.
He invited the City Council to appoint a Liaison to the Planning Commission as outlined in
Section V Council Liaison of the Bylaws.
Commissioner Miller suggested under Section X A Attendance, it is cumbersome to say "Any
member attending less than 20 meetings per year ..." rather than stating how many absences for
the year, because sometimes only one meeting is held in a given month.
Planning Commission members discussed several options of how many meetings could be
missed before action was taken.
Director Ericson stated the Planning Commission could take action at any point if they felt
someone was not participating. He stated Section X A could be changed to reflect whatever the
Planning Commission recommends.
Commissioner Miller stated she likes a certain number in a row without notification.
Commissioner Gums recommended any member missing four meetings in a row without
notification.
Director Ericson pointed out the standard at this time is missing four meetings assuming there
are 24 meetings in the year.
Chair Stevenson recommended missing three regularly scheduled meetings without notification.
Director Ericson stated Staff would draft up a recommendation for approval.
S. Next Planning Commission Meeting:
A. January 24, 2007
B. February 7,2007
9. Adjournment to Agenda Session
There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the
meeting at 8:25 p.m.
(The meeting immediately adjourned to the Agenda Session)
Respectfully submitted,
Jim Ericson
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
Community Development Director
Transcribed by:
Dianna Wise
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
January 10, 2007
Page 12
PLEASE SIGN IN
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE:
Name
Address
Phone
C
G�GG �ti f. Z ✓rd
3 '/'S` L e m 5, Yv ( V 1 C' bull -)12.
M,) U 11 D S V r C' v ivr N; S
G, 3-7
L/7 fl.G11i5rj
CT- fi U'116, 7--0 !I%/,
3$iS-3�GG7%
`//(t^.ni('9G/'tN
7�X/�7j-
22
(//��
(� {
T2 6FT
It
f7A 3
CJ\ovs KK"c
'79 so - �"t ���'�F-7
3a
2 �
C) , Z -
IVID �
/
FI
gl6s-CFcS��/rJoG� RcY,
IV`- `/6)1�z
hci�ew actr
�'L.(-G l -e<,- y r/c-
S --)� G . _3 ,:' ,V v/ j 4 x�r
�3zGS Cws Loco gc ,)
ts3r�s� �r�K G`%�l1 C
fGti ;r� ii e J>e_r
ZD
s
g qv tI
76 � 7RL- o'72-7