Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-19-2006 PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting July 19, 2006 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. July 19, 2006. ______________________________________________________________________ 2. Roll Call Members Present: Chair Stevenson; Commissioners Hegland, Hull, Miller, Scotch, and Zwirn Absent and Excused: Commissioner Meehlhause Also Present: Community Development Director Jim Ericson Planning Associate Heidi Heller ______________________________________________________________________ Index to Minutes Page VR2006-006 Consideration of a Variance request for 2 Tyson Company at 4825 Mustang Circle Applicant: D&A Development Address: 4825 Mustang Circle Chair Stevenson asked if there were any additional items to be added to the agenda. 3. Approve Minutes A. June 21, 2006. MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Zwirn /Commissioner Hull, to approve the Minutes of the June 21, 2006 regular Planning Commission meetings as slightly amended. Ayes – 6 Nays – 0 Motion carried. Mounds View Planning Commission July 19, 2006 Regular Meeting Page 2 ________________________________________________________________________ 4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda None. ______________________________________________________________________ 5. Planning Cases A. VR2006-006 Consideration of a Variance request for Tyson Company at 4825 Mustang Circle Applicant: D&A Development Address: 4825 Mustang Circle Planning Associate Heller presented the request for consideration of a variance to reduce the front building and parking setbacks at Tyson Company located at 4825 Mustang Circle. Planning Associate Heller stated the applicant proposes expanding their facility located at 4825 Mustang Circle. The applicant is requesting to construct a new building with front corners within seven and ten feet from the property line and the additional parking area up to the front property line, with no setback from the Mustang Circle right of way. Planning Associate Heller informed the Commission that this is the first step of a larger facility proposal for the Tyson Company. The property has significant wetlands. All storm water from the area drains into this wetland. The proposed new building, future expansion space, and rail spur do not encroach into the wetlands. Planning Associate Heller stated the applicant is requesting 30-foot and 33-foot variances from the front building setback and a 40-foot variance from the front parking setback requirement. The applicant is proposing to locate the southeast corner of the building seven feet from the property line, the northeast corner of the building ten feet from the property line, and the parking lot directly on the property line. Planning Associate Heller informed the Commission that the applicant would like to construct an additional 120,000 square foot building and a railroad track that would enter this building. The additional building would provide room for four or five rail cars to load and unload inside the building. An additional 23 parking stalls would be added between the building and the front property line. Planning Associate Heller informed the Commission that they are to consider the application for the set back variance only. She asked the Commission to make its decision based on the specified criteria the applicant must meet to demonstrate a hardship or practical difficulty associated with the property which makes a literal interpretation of the Code overly burdensome or restrictive. Mounds View Planning Commission July 19, 2006 Regular Meeting Page 3 ________________________________________________________________________ Planning Associate Heller reported the property is very large and not necessarily irregularly shaped. The large wetland area and lower ground does limit the space that can be utilized on the property. Planning Associate Heller stated the literal interpretation of the provisions of the Zoning Code would deprive the applicant of the rights enjoyed by other properties in the same zone, in that most properties do not have wetlands. The applicant had no control over the shape of the lot or the wetlands present on the property. Any additional expansion would require moving closer to the wetlands. Planning Associate Heller informed the Commission that there could be justification to grant the variance due to the large wetland area on the property and because it is located in an industrial area. The 30-foot and 33-foot variances for the building setback and the 40-foot variance for the parking lot is the minimum amount that would allow the applicant to have the size building required and to add 23 additional parking stalls. Planning Associate Heller indicated the variance may be detrimental to the purpose of this Title unless it is determined that enough hardship is present to justify seven and ten foot building setbacks and a zero parking lot setback. It may be hard to justify these reduced setbacks due to the size of the property. Planning Associate Heller stated the proposed building and parking lot should not result in any adverse effects. A determination as to whether or not the rerouted storm water drainage would be adequate to not create drainage problems in this area is a condition of the approval. Planning Associate Heller reminded the Commission of their task to approve, deny or table the request for a setback variance. Chair Stevenson opened the public hearing at 7:14 pm Mr. Jim Freichels, 4860 Mustang Circle, approached the Commission. He stated he owns Dell- Comm, Inc. just east of the development. He has not seen the site plan, but his concern is that of snow removal on the cul-de-sac. He would like this addressed. Piles and drifts of snow from the Tyson Company, his company driveway and from the City plowing have been as high as 12 feet at times. He is not against the development; he wants the snow issue addressed. Mr. Dale Tellers, 4825 Mustang Circle, remarked he was not aware of the snow issues. He turned it over to Mr. Thomas Hailey. Mr. Thomas Hailey, MLS Engineering and representative for the Tyson Company, has ideas as to how the snow issue can be addressed. He believes the snow could be pushed towards the wetlands to drain. Mr. Freichels said the cul-de-sac snow plowing is an issue also. Mounds View Planning Commission July 19, 2006 Regular Meeting Page 4 ________________________________________________________________________ Mr. Hailey said they can take steps to push more snow back towards the wetlands. Mr. Freichels asked where the specific setback is. Mr. Hailey indicated on the aerial map, the setback location. Chair Stevenson closed the hearing at 7:25 p.m. Commissioner Hegland suggested the City also has to come up with a way to deal with the snow issue on the cul-de-sac. Commissioner Miller inquired as to whether the Zoning Code has an issue with putting snow into the wetlands. Community Development Director Ericson responded he would have to check on this. Chair Stevenson talked about the buffer to the wetland. Commissioner Hegland asked if it was something the City can accommodate by plowing onto someone’s property. The City does not want to impose on the property owners. Community Development Director Ericson responded that an area where snow is deposited tends to be on City’s right of way. If there is not sufficient right of way or a place to put the snow, the City grades it out and pushes it somewhere else. Commissioner Scotch stated there is also the option to have it hauled away. Chair Stevenson stated that as long as Tyson Company is willing to work with their neighbors at this time, the snow build up would not cause a substantial problem. He instructed Mr. Tellers to also work with the City. Mr. Freichels stated the new building should not create any additional snow issues. Mr. Hailey said the cul-de-sac would not be adversely affected. Commissioner Scotch asked Mr. Tellers how many rail cars would be coming onto the proposed new building. Mr. Tellers stated he needs 350 feet to bring five rail cars into the building. Commissioner Scotch asked if the building could be stacked to have more space in the front along Mustang and could the five cars swing in. Mr. Hailey said that would not work because rail deck would be four feet below the floor so they can drive directly in. Mounds View Planning Commission July 19, 2006 Regular Meeting Page 5 ________________________________________________________________________ Commissioner Hegland asked if there was a minimum turning radius for the track. Mr. Hailey said yes and they are being told to be careful with this radius because the cars would be putting pressure on the rail. He indicated that they are already at the maximum radius. Commissioner Scotch asked about angling the building. Commissioner Hegland suggested perhaps it could be pulled to the south. Commissioner Scotch asked Mr. Hailey and Mr. Tellers to show her on the site plan if it could be angled. They pointed out on the site plan the operational problems with the angle option. Access for the rail would be through the neighbor’s property and would cut his property in half if they went in straight off the existing tracks in New Brighton. The neighbor is not accepting of that possibility. There is also a reverse curve that would not leave much room and that could cause cars to derail. Commissioner Miller cannot see approving a zero parking setback. She indicated she does not have a problem with the ten-foot setback on the northeast or the southeast at seven-foot. She is having a problem with parking along Mustang Drive and the setback. She does not see how they can approve a zero set back with all the other activities happening along this area. She prefers the setback to be somewhat off the line. Commissioner Scotch agreed that it needs to be off the property line. Chair Stevenson asked if it was a five-foot easement to the road. Planning Associate Heller replied there is a total of 60 feet of right of way with the road. She indicated there is approximately five feet on either side of the asphalt to the property line. Chair Stevenson asked if the parking lot proposal would be a concrete curb along Mustang Circle. Mr. Hailey stated that if the parking lot is run out to the street, he would suggest a roll top curb where cars only could drive over it. He suggested putting green space along the center of the driveway and from the edge of the driveway to the back of the curb. Chair Stevenson asked Mr. Hailey if he would be willing to come off the zero set back with the green space. Mr. Hailey indicated on the site plan, where the parking lot would end in relation to the right of way. Some green space would be located along there. Chair Stevenson asked what the length would be for the zero setbacks. Mr. Hailey pointed to the zero setback area on the site plan. Commissioner Scotch said they would need to revisit the parking lot. Commissioner Miller asked who the parking is for and how many cars would fit into the parking lot. Mr. Hailey replied the parking would be for employees only. He believes he could fit 24 total parking stalls in the parking area. Mounds View Planning Commission July 19, 2006 Regular Meeting Page 6 ________________________________________________________________________ Chair Stevenson asked if this is the only employee parking available on the site. Mr. Tellers said it was not. He further explained he is expanding this building to replace their building in St. Paul, and that they are a public warehouse. Mr. Tellers stated that their parking need may increase for a few hours a day as they bring in additional workers to unload cars. He explained they have a total of ten warehouse employees at their St. Paul facility that would move to Mounds View with this expansion. Commissioner Scotch asked if there would be parking between the new building and south side of the main building. Mr. Tellers indicated he would not want to do this because he anticipates dock doors in that location. Commissioner Scotch asked what would be done about space between the utility building and main building. Mr. Tellers pointed out on the site plan that it would be tied together with the new building. He also indicated they may want to build a third story on the new building for record storage. Commissioner Scotch asked Mr. Hailey to point out all the parking stalls. Mr. Hailey reiterated there would be between 23-24 stalls and pointed to the locations on the site plan. Commissioner Hegland asked if they are trying to meet a code requirement on the parking spots. Commissioner Hegland indicated another option may be to do a variance on the parking instead because they do not anticipate a need for additional parking. Mr. Tellers said, as it sits today, he does not anticipate a need for additional parking. Chair Stevenson stated at this time all the Commission needs to do is determine the setbacks; where they want them and look at the seven and ten foot setbacks and not allow for the zero setbacks. He proposed a two-foot setback to the City’s right of way. Commissioner Hegland said there is nowhere to put the snow and they would be pushing snow back and forth in the cul-de-sac. Chair Stevenson restated there is not a problem with the seven and ten-foot setback requests on the southeast and northeast corners on the street. He indicated he has no problem with them because of the wetlands. The wetlands create enough of a hardship because they cannot go any other direction. Commissioner Miller stated it is a self-imposed hardship because they want the larger building. She asked how much of a variance this would be. Planning Associate Heller indicated it would be 30 and 33-foot variances for the building, and a 40-foot variance for the parking lot. Chair Stevenson asked Mr. Tellers if he needs the additional space or could he function with the current size of the building. He also stated he understands the need for the rail. Mounds View Planning Commission July 19, 2006 Regular Meeting Page 7 ________________________________________________________________________ Mr. Tellers stated that shrinking the size of building too far would cause an economic hardship. Chair Stevenson asked if they would store the rail cars. Mr. Tellers said they would unload the freight for storage. Commissioner Miller asked if he rents space. Mr. Tellers said it is business-to-business where freight is stored until moved. He explained this is a very competitive business. Mr. Tellers said he is never sure what type of business they will attract. Commissioner Miller asked how wide the parking lot would be with a zero setback. Mr. Hailey replied the minimum width is about 40 feet from the building to the right of way. This varies somewhat at the curve. It is 40 feet right at the corner. Commissioner Scotch stated there is no rail spur there currently. She asked if they could encroach more on the buffer area. Commissioner Hegland questioned if they could park along the street and parallel park on the property. Mr. Hailey said they looked at all options and the one presented to the Commission appears to be the only viable option. Commissioner Miller asked how far off the property the rail goes now. Mr. Hailey stated the rail would still need to be built on the property. Planning Associate Heller pointed out on the site plan where the current rail is located in New Brighton. Commissioner Miller asked if they need to obtain a right of way for the rail line. Mr. Tellers said they are working with Belair on the right of way as Belair also needs rail. Commissioner Hegland pointed out the northwest corner and asked if that would be the loading dock area. Mr. Tellers replied it would. Commissioner Scotch stated the parking and the zero set back is the problem. Commissioner Scotch asked where the lot line is between them and the neighbor to the south. Mr. Tellers thought it was about forty- five feet. He stated they need to keep about 40 to 50 feet from the lot line open for storm drainage. Chair Stevenson asked about the 20-foot building set back on the south side of the building. Mr. Hailey stated it was an easement and they could only build up to that point. Commissioner Hegland inquired as to what the idea is behind the five rail car number, and could they just have four cars. Mr. Tellers said it would be a big difference. If he cannot fit the number of cars in, the railroad will charge a switching charge and increase the demurrage charge. This is Mounds View Planning Commission July 19, 2006 Regular Meeting Page 8 ________________________________________________________________________ the problem they have in St. Paul. They do about 400 rail cars per year. They anticipate this number to increase due to the lack of truck drivers, the price of gas, and the highway system is at its maximum. He believes five rail cars is the minimum that would work. Commissioner Scotch asked if there are parking spaces around the old building that could help meet the parking code for the new building. The Planning Commissioners, Mr. Hailey, and Mr. Tellers discussed other parking options. Chair Stevenson remarked he would like to see more parking and a buffer along Mustang Drive. He does not want a zero setback. Commissioner Miller asked if instead of the seven-foot setback it could be a ten-foot setback. Commissioner Scotch indicated that would provide a 10-foot setback all the way. If the parking can be accommodated in the back, the street side would be accommodated for snow removal and such. She also suggested that perhaps the neighbor across the street would be willing to share parking. Chair Stevenson asked what business is located at 4800. Mr. Tellers indicated it is York. Community Development Director Ericson stated when Staff was approached by Mr. Tellers, they were very excited to see an expansion as significant as this and they are very willing to work with them. He indicated this may be an example of too much building and development being proposed that there just is not enough room for. Director Ericson emphasized he is glad the Commission is taking a good look at this. There very well could be a justification for some type of setback. Perhaps the 7.5-foot building setback and the zero foot parking setback are more than the Commission is willing to allow. They need to consider what would happen if another business took over this building. Not necessarily because of the setback but what it would do to the parking. Director Ericson said maybe it does not make sense to have the 7.5 foot setback. Chair Stevenson suggested a ten foot setback for the entire building be the minimum. He indicated Mr. Hailey and Mr. Tellers should come back with an alternate plan. Planning Associate Heller pointed out the large utility easement with underground pipes. She would have to talk to Public Works about parking over this easement. Commissioner Hegland asked if the rail would be crossing over the easement. Planning Associate Heller stated it would and that Public Works have looked at the plan and it would have to be built up so the rail could cross over it. Chair Stevenson asked the Commission if they agree the minimum setback of ten feet is acceptable. Commissioner Zwirn stated he is not ready to vote on this at this time. Mounds View Planning Commission July 19, 2006 Regular Meeting Page 9 ________________________________________________________________________ Commissioner Miller suggested Mr. Hailey and Mr. Tellers come back with the alternate plan. Chair Stevenson suggested it be tabled. Mr. Tellers asked how long this would delay the project. Chair Stevenson said it would only delay it by two weeks. He would like to see a proposal that shows what they have talked about. MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Zwirn/Commissioner Miller, to table Resolution 848-06, Consideration of a request for a Variance to Reduce the Front Building and Parking Setback at Tyson Company Located at 4825 Mustang Circle, Planning Case VR206-006. Ayes – 6 Nays – 0 Motion carried. Chair Stevenson stated this would be tabled until the first meeting in August. _____________________________________________________________________ 6. Other Planning Activity None _____________________________________________________________________ 7. Next Planning Commission Meeting: A. August 2, 2006. B. August 16, 2006. ______________________________________________________________________ 8. Adjournment to Agenda Session MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Miller /Commissioner Hull, to adjourn the meeting. There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the meeting at 8:10 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.