Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-07-2007 PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting March 7, 2007 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. March 7, 2007 ______________________________________________________________________________ 2. Roll Call Members Present: Chair Stevenson, Commissioners Cramblit, Gunn, Meehlhause, Miller, and Walsh-Kaczmarek Absent and Excused: Commissioner Lang Also Present: Community Development Director Ericson, Planning Associate Heller ______________________________________________________________________________ Index to Minutes Page Planning Cases MI2007-001; ZC2007-002; CU2007-002; CP2007-001: 2 Consideration of a Minor Subdivision, Rezoning, Conditional Use Permit and Comp Plan Amendment. Applicant: Moundsview Fina: Leon Theis & Tom Manke – “The Station” Address: 2280 County Road I. ______________________________________________________________________________ 3. Approve Minutes A. January 10, 2007 MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Cramblit/ Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek to approve the Minutes of the January 10, 2007 regular Planning Commission meeting as slightly amended. Ayes – 6 Nays – 0 Motion carried. ______________________________________________________________________________ Mounds View Planning Commission March 7, 2007 Regular Meeting Page 2 ________________________________________________________________________ 4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda None. ______________________________________________________________________________ 5. Planning Case MI2007-001; ZC2007-002; CU2007-002; CP2007-001: Consideration of a Minor Subdivision, Rezoning, Conditional Use Permit and Comp Plan Amendment. Applicant: Mounds View Fina: Leon Theis & Tom Manke – “The Station” Address: 2280 County Road I. Planning Associate Heller stated The Station at 2280 County Road I has been there for nearly 50 years and exists as a legal nonconforming use. She indicated the property owners would like to add two additional fuel pumps to the site and expand the current canopy to cover both sets of pumps. She explained the owners must bring the property into compliance in order to make the changes. Planning Associate Heller explained the four planning actions before the Commission. She stated one is a minor subdivision, however, the lot size is only 9500 square feet, and 22,500 square feet, with lot dimensions of 130’ x 150’ feet, is required for a gas station. She commented the owners have entered into a purchase agreement with the property owners directly to the south. The property would almost double in depth, and the size would increase from .22 acres to .56 acres, bringing them over the minimum lot requirements for a gas station. Planning Associate Heller stated the minor subdivision would be a lot split and a combination. She pointed out five small parcels currently make up the station and adjoining properties. She explained these would be turned into two parcels. Planning Associate Heller stated The Station is currently located in a B-2 zoning district with a land use designation of Neighborhood Commercial. She explained in order for the gas station to become conforming, the property must be rezoned to a B-3 and get a Conditional Use Permit. She pointed out a Comprehensive Plan amendment is also required for a land use designation change to Highway Commercial. Planning Associate Heller stated this case is unique in that all four elements must work together for each request to be applicable. She explained The Station was built in 1959 as a gas station and has existed as such since that time. She explained The Station originally had four pumps, however, two were removed when the canopy was built several years ago. Planning Associate Heller explained the new property line jogs around a garage currently being used by the Alano Society. She stated that in order to have the five-foot setback for an accessory building, the property line must jog around the garage. Planning Associate Heller stated park dedication fees are required for a subdivision. She explained, in this case, the subdivision would not result in any additional dwelling units, Mounds View Planning Commission March 7, 2007 Regular Meeting Page 3 ________________________________________________________________________ although the usage would intensify somewhat with the two additional fuel pumps. She informed the Commission it could decide if fees should be required. Planning Associate Heller reported the Certificate of Survey and Title Commitment have been sent to the City Attorney’s office for review. She stated the City’s Public Works Department has also reviewed the site plans and did not have any issues with the proposal. She said Public Works indicated any driveway access changes could be made when the street reconstruction project happens in the area. She stated the site plans have also been sent to the Ramsey County Public Works because The Station is located on a County road. She indicated concerns are not expected as no driveway changes would be made. Planning Associate Heller stated the task is to rezone the location from a B-2 to a B-3. She explained according to City Code, in order to approve a rezoning request it must be determined if the requested zoning designation would be consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan and not detrimental to the neighborhood or adversely affect any adjoining properties. She explained The Station has been in place for nearly 50 years and the use would not change. She stated the two additional gas pumps would not necessarily increase the customer base, rather it should improve customer service to the current customer base. Planning Associate Heller reported a single family residential area exists across the street to the north of The Station. She stated The Station building is attached to two other spaces, which are used as office and commercial. She indicated the building to the west is owned by the New Brighton Alano Society and a grocery store and a manufacturing company are located to the south. She stated this small commercial area is zoned B-2 which is appropriate for all the current uses except The Station. She mentioned a church exists across Adams Street to the east and several R-4 multi-family rental housing buildings are located to the west. Planning Associate Heller stated a zoning amendment to B-3 might seem inappropriate due to the lack of higher intensity commercial zoning in the area, however, this case is unique in that the use of the property would not change with the rezoning. Planning Associate Heller stated traffic access would not change and the driveways would remain the same. She indicated the additional pumps should improve traffic flow around the area. She stated the additional fuel pumps would allow more customers to pump fuel at the same time and reduce the traffic back-up waiting to access a pump. She stated the removal of the eastern section of the building should allow better traffic flow through the site as well. Planning Associate Heller explained gas stations require at least four parking spaces and the retail store requires one space for each 100 square feet of retail space plus one space per employee. She stated the parking requirements for The Station would be two spaces for two employees per shift, 12 spaces for the retail store, and four spaces for the gas pumps for a total of 18 spaces. She indicated there is enough paved surface on site to add one additional parking space, as 17 spaces currently exist on the site. Planning Associate Heller stated The Station owners do not anticipate adding additional retail space, however, there is enough room on site to add parking spaces if needed in the future. Mounds View Planning Commission March 7, 2007 Regular Meeting Page 4 ________________________________________________________________________ Planning Associate Heller stated that for the Commission to support the requested rezoning, it must find that the request would not be inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and would not cause or create adverse impacts to the surrounding properties. She stated a rezoning request is approved by ordinance with two readings by the City Council with the ordinance taking affect 30 days after the final reading. Chair Stevenson stated he would like the comprehensive definitions for highway commercial and neighborhood commercial included before it is passed on to Council. Planning Associate Heller read the definition of each for the Commission members. Chair Stevenson stated he sees a problem with that definition because there are two types of gas stations and the Commission has only one to work with. He said this is a small community neighborhood gas station, not a highway designated station. He asked if the City could change the code or is this what is designated by the State. Community Development Director Ericson replied the Planning Commission could recommend a change to the comprehensive plan and the zoning code. He stated the Planning Commission could create the two class gas station system. He stated the zoning code requires gas stations be in a B-3 designation, if the station goes away, the Planning Commission could be looking at whether the property is a true B-3 planned use designation. He suggested if the Planning Commission considered that option, Staff would have to look at the comp plan and see where this type of gas station falls. Director Ericson stated it is a good suggestion as it would guard against a more intense land use coming onto the property at a later date. Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek asked how this would be incorporated into this proposal. Chair Stevenson replied it would be a two step process by making the change to the comprehensive plan designation definitions at this point. He mentioned that when the Comp Plan comes out in about two years, this change could be incorporated into the update process. He stated he thinks the Planning Commission could incorporate the definition change. He stated if this property is designated as Highway Commercial, there would be nothing stopping a Holiday gas station or other disruptive commercial entity from building there. Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek asked if there is information on why the two pumps were taken out. She asked why the City said they could not add them back in. Planning Associate Heller replied because it is a nonconforming lot. She explained with nonconforming you can take something away, but could not add to it. She stated The Station must have a 22,500 square foot site in order to become conforming. She explained that with the land purchase, they would now be able to meet that requirement and thus the other requests could now be met also. Chair Stevenson stated Commissioner Miller, Commissioner Meehlhause, and he were on the Planning Commission when this was brought up before. He stated he remembers the thoughts Mounds View Planning Commission March 7, 2007 Regular Meeting Page 5 ________________________________________________________________________ were more towards the size of the lot. He indicated it was denied due to the size of the lot at that time. Chair Stevenson stated the new proposal is much different. Commissioner Miller mentioned she liked the idea of a two tier designation. She stated County road I has a significant amount of traffic. Commissioner Cramblit asked if a CUP could be approved if this is kept as a neighborhood commercial designation. Chair Stevenson replied the Zoning Code would have to be changed to a B-3 for a gas station to exist on this property. He stated it had nothing to do with the Comprehensive Plan designation. Planning Associate Heller said to keep in mind that this is a one half acre site even with the purchase of the property. She stated it is highly unlikely that a larger gas station would fit on the property even if the purchased the rest of the Alano property. Chair Stevenson said if someone were to look at our Comp Plan and saw a Highway Commercial in this designated area, it would not look right. Director Ericson stated he looked at the Comp Plan and meshed it with the existing Zoning Code to see what the ramifications would be, and would this open the door to other smaller independent gas stations. He pointed out there are some properties zoned B-2 but do not have the neighborhood commercial designation, and another with the neighborhood commercial designation and not the B-2 zoning. He explained if the Planning Commission wanted to make the change to the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan, the change would effect this property and no others. Chair Stevenson commented he was thinking it would have to be a B-3 for a conforming gas station. Director Ericson replied only if that is the position of the Planning Commission and City Council. He explained they could recommend the Zoning Code allow for a conditional use neighborhood gas station in a B-2 district. Chair Stevenson stated he was thinking along the lines of a B-3 Neighborhood Commercial designation. Director Ericson pointed out a B-3 designation would open the door for more intensive commercial uses at that location; something that would not be a neighborhood type use. Commissioner Miller asked if a B-2 limited business also has a tier in it. Chair Stevenson stated he had not considered that, as he was thinking of allowing the B-3 gas station in a Neighborhood Commercial if it were kept to the four pumps. Mounds View Planning Commission March 7, 2007 Regular Meeting Page 6 ________________________________________________________________________ Director Ericson replied he could do that as long as the comp plan still reflected the Neighborhood Commercial designation. Commissioner Miller asked about the small market down the street that wanted to put in pumps. Director Ericson replied it is zoned B-1 and would not support a gas station because of the size of the lot, the zoning and the comprehensive plan. Commissioner Gunn clarified the B-1, B-2, and B-3 designations. She pointed out the gas station currently falls under the B-2 designation. Chair Stevenson stated the Commission is not quite ready to look at this. He indicated he did not want to see it designated as Highway Commercial. Director Ericson stated Staff agrees. Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek recommended stipulations as to the size of the gas station and to also look at lighting in commercial areas. She stated the ambient light from The Station’s additional canopy could cause a glow into the surrounding neighborhoods. She indicated she wants to know if Public Works looked at the environmental concerns of the underground storage tanks. Director Ericson replied the new tanks were installed in 1995 and had been inspected. Mr. Tom Manke, Co-Owner of The Station, stated two new tanks were installed in 1995. He said the lines are tested annually. He explained the two new pumps would be built to the south and tied into the existing tanks; no new tanks would be added. Mr. Manke explained ambient lighting for commercial use has changed in the recent years in that now 90 percent of the light shines down onto the dispensers. Director Ericson stated there is time to bring this back to the next meeting and prepare it for City Council. He indicated he and Planning Associate Heller would develop wording to address the issues related to the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Code. Chair Stevenson asked if there were members of the audience who would like to share their thoughts. Mr. Paul Fedor, 5491Adams Street, stated he owns the property south of The Station. He said he usually preaches about the expansion of business. He stated he is always for expansion and believes the City Council and Planning Commission should do anything in their power to aid new expansion, within reason. He stated he sat on the Planning Commission for nine years and spent a great deal of time on this issue. Mr. Fedor said the reason The Station was allowed there was because it was already in place. He stated he thought it would make more sense to develop the entire corner correctly with the necessary setbacks. He said that once a property is rezoned at Mounds View Planning Commission March 7, 2007 Regular Meeting Page 7 ________________________________________________________________________ a higher designation, it never goes back down. He believes this would increase traffic in the neighborhood. Chair Stevenson asked Mr. Fedor if there were more traffic problems previously with the four pumps. Mr. Fedor replied that the four pumps were located on the north side of the station off County Road I so that is where most of the traffic entered and exited. He said most of the traffic enters and exits off Adams Street now. He stated this was a nonconforming use 50 years ago and did not know if the Planning Commission should grant all these conditions just because it is there. He stated variances were approved for hardships when he was on the Planning Commission. He indicated this is not worthy of a change in the Comp Plan. He asked, relative to zoning, what the Commission would tell the next person who wanted a spot rezone. Commissioner Gunn asked if it is already zoned B-2, why is it classified as Neighborhood Commercial. Planning Associate Heller replied that is a Comp Plan designation. Director Ericson stated there is not a perfect marriage by name or between the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan. He explained the labels are different, causing confusion. He stated Mr. Fedor gives some compelling reasons as to why you would change the Comprehensive Plan. He stated Staff would look at this and see if there is a way to address The Station without rezoning. He stated that perhaps there is a way to satisfy the needs of The Station, but to not change the zoning. Commissioner Miller asked if CUP would be needed if it were put into the B-2 designation. Director Ericson replied it is a B-2 zone, however, City Code did not recognize a CUP in a B-2 zone. He stated Staff needs to put some thought into this. Commissioner Miller stated she has seen cars lined up into the street to get in with two pumps. She said she did not think it would increase traffic, but might make the traffic flow better. Chair Stevenson stated the traffic congestion would decrease. Planning Associate Heller stated this was a public hearing and she did receive a call from the neighboring church across the street indicating that since very little would change on the property, they did not have any issues with this request. ______________________________________________________________________________ 6. Other Planning Activity A. Proposed Tree Preservation & Landscaping Ordinance Mounds View Planning Commission March 7, 2007 Regular Meeting Page 8 ________________________________________________________________________ Planning Associate Heller reported City Council had been talking about a tree preservation ordinance for several years. She stated she, Director Ericson, and Rick Wriskey, the City Forester, have been working on this for quite a while. She indicated they have talked to the City Council and received good suggestions. She stated they would also go to the Parks and Recreation Commission with the ordinance for their feedback. Planning Associate Heller stated the main goals of the ordinance is to encourage tree preservation, save larger existing trees, gain replacement trees when trees are removed, specify landscaping requirements for new development, and incorporate maintenance standards for landscaping such as removal of broken, fallen, or diseased branches, trees, and stumps. She stated that the City realizes it is not reasonable to keep trees or wooded areas in some cases, but would like to be able to have some trees preserved and/or replaced. She explained there are exceptions to the replacement requirements, such as disease, storms, or other acts of nature, or trees lost as a result of utility trimming or maintenance. Planning Associate Heller explained the ordinance would not necessarily require a property owner to replace every tree taken down. She stated the ordinance puts a cap on the maximum number of replacement trees that would be required, depending on the size of the property and the amount of remaining trees. Planning Associate Heller asked the Planning Commission to review and discuss the planned ordinance. Chair Stevenson pointed out a lot of work had been put into this and this is needed. Commissioner Gunn asked about comments on page two stating property owners could be fined. She asked how a tree could be illegally removed if it is on their property. Planning Associate Heller replied it would be based on what might be done beyond what the ordinance states is allowable to remove. Commissioner Cramblit asked if the tree replacement would be on personal property or could they plant on a specified city property. Planning Associate Heller replied this was still up for discussion. She stated Staff is working on the idea on how the replacement trees would be implemented. She reported the City Forester would be involved with this. Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek applauded the effort for a tree ordinance. She stated her concerns are about the resources needed to monitor residential tree maintenance or preservation and secondly she would not want the homeowners to get into a hardship condition. She stated as an example, tree damage due to disease or a storm; replacing trees could become quite expensive for homeowners. She stated she did not want to get into a situation where enforcement becomes overwhelming. Mounds View Planning Commission March 7, 2007 Regular Meeting Page 9 ________________________________________________________________________ Planning Associate Heller acknowledged enforcement would be hard. She stated often times if someone is cutting down trees, staff hears about it from the neighbors. She stated the City did not have the staff to keep track of whenever a tree is removed or the knowledge of how many trees there are in the City now. She replied that secondly, trees damaged due to disease or an act of nature would not have to be replaced. She stated they may have to be removed for safety reasons. Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek remarked she did not want the City Council or Planning Commission to become viewed as an enemy. Commissioner Meehlhause stated it addresses what happens if a tree is removed. He indicated the homeowner needs to have control of their property. Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek stated getting the word out will be a challenge and did not want to create a back log. She said she could see this directed more towards new development, but would have to look at it more concerning existing homeowners. Commissioner Cramblit responded that any new development should have a tree survey indicating the species of trees. He stated the developer must replace a percentage of each species removed. He agreed that it would be nearly impossible to police the existing trees. Commissioner Gunn asked if it says trees removed must be replaced one for one. Planning Associate Heller replied it would depend on the size of the tree and the number of trees removed. Commissioner Gunn asked who determines how many trees need to be replaced. Planning Associate Heller replied the City Forester would evaluate the property and recommend the number of trees. Commissioner Cramblit stated a stipulation could be added about the size the replacement tree must be. Commissioner Gunn replied some people could not afford to do this. Commissioner Cramblit stated if it is a mass development, roots are then removed. Chair Stevenson stated trees would not necessarily be put back in the same place. Commissioner Gunn likes the landscaping element. Commissioner Miller stated there have been provisions for landscaping for developments included in this new ordinance. Mounds View Planning Commission March 7, 2007 Regular Meeting Page 10 ________________________________________________________________________ A discussion among the Commissioners ensued on the criteria and specification for the ordinance. Chair Stevenson stated this is a good start and indicated it could be changed as needed. Planning Associate Heller explained ordinances are not perfect. She stated one thing this ordinance would do is create a tree inventory requirement. She stated often times a developer would submit a site plan, but this would enforce a tree by tree evaluation. She indicated a developer could possibly be given a credit towards the landscaping requirements for each tree saved. Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek asked if this would apply to developments or people looking at redoing their yards. Planning Associate Heller replied this is for development. She stated there might be individual cases where a homeowner wanted to remove all the trees in their yard to redo it for whatever reason. Planning Associate Heller asked everyone to let her know if there are more comments as this is still a work in progress. B. Review proposed Health & Beauty Services definition Community Development Director Ericson stated this request was presented by a business owner who would like to do some alternative wellness at Mounds View Square. He stated this was brought to the City Council and they asked that the applicant define more clearly what she is looking to do, look at the code and broaden what this encompasses. Director Ericson stated a whole range of alternative wellness uses are becoming more popular. He stated the applicant would like to provide healing touch and aromatherapy. He stated the resolution is to amend the code to define what health and beauty should include with respect to this particular business. He stated the resolution would expand the scope of health and beauty service definition in the code. Director Ericson stated it would include such things as hair salons, fingernail salons, nutrition and diet centers, meditation and yoga clinics, spa treatments and alternative wellness services such as aromatherapy, acupuncture and hypnosis, excluding therapeutic massage or other businesses otherwise defined or regulated by the code. Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek stated the hot rock massage might call it alternative wellness or therapeutic massage, so perhaps it should go into one area or another. Director Ericson stated the differentiation is if the hands are touching the body. He stated this is new ground for many cities. He indicated the League of Minnesota Cities has no information and many communities have nothing in their codes. He asked the Commissioners for any recommendations they have, or if they are happy with how the draft resolution is written, it could be approved and passed on to City Council. Mounds View Planning Commission Regular Meeting March 7, 2007 Page it MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Gunn/Commissioner Cramblit. To approve Resolution 860-07, a Resolution Recommending Approval of an Amendment to Chapter 1102 of the Mounds View Zoning Code to Define "Health and Beauty Services." Ayes — 6 Nays — 0 Next Planning Commission Meetings: A. March 21, 2007 B. April 4, 2007 8. Adjournment to Agenda Session Motion carried. There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the meeting at 8:29 p.m. (The meeting immediately adjourned to the Agenda Session) Respectfully submitted, Jim Ericson Community Development Director Transcribed by: Dianna Wise TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. PLEASE SIGN IN MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: 3 I � /0� Name Address Phone - i t