HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-16-2005
PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Regular Meeting
March 16, 2005
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 16, 2005.
______________________________________________________________________________
2. Roll Call
Members Present: Commissioners Miller, Zwirn, Hegland, Hull, and Stevenson
Absent and Excused: Commissioners Meehlhause and Scotch.
Also Present: Community Development Director Ericson
________________________________________________________________________
Index to Minutes Page
Planning Case CU05-001. Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit 2
(CUP) for an oversized garage at 5343 Clifton Drive
Planning Case DE05-001. Consideration of a Concept Plan for Hotel
Expansion at The Mermaid located at 2200 County Road 10 3
_______________________________________________________________________
3. Approve Minutes
February 2 and 16, 2005.
MOTION/SECOND: Miller/Zwirn. To approve the Minutes of the February 2 and 16, 2005
regular Planning Commission meetings as slightly amended.
Ayes –5 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
Mounds View Planning Commission March 16, 2005
Regular Meeting Page 2
________________________________________________________________________
4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda
None.
______________________________________________________________________________
5. Special Order of Business: Oath of Office for New Appointment.
Community Development Director Ericson administered the oath of office to Al Hull, the new
Planning Commission member who was appointed to a three-year term, and the Commission
welcomed him.
______________________________________________________________________________
6. Planning Case CU05-001. Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for an
oversized garage at 5343 Clifton Drive.
Community Development Director Ericson informed the Commission that the applicants were
not able to be present at the meeting, but that Bill Siercks, the applicant’s father, was present to
answer any questions. Director Ericson stated the applicants propose to construct a 457 square
foot addition onto the existing 576 square foot garage to create a garage that has an area of 1,032
square feet. He explained that a Conditional Use Permit is required for garages exceeding 952
square feet. He stated that the applicants initially were requesting to build a larger garage, but it
had been determined that it would have been too large for the back yard, so they had scaled
down the size of the proposed addition. He informed the Commission that the request for the
Conditional Use Permit to construct the 1,032 square foot garage satisfies the requirements as
stated in Section 1106.03 and 1106.04, Subdivision 6 of the Mounds View Zoning Code.
Director Ericson stated that the proposed garage addition would be set back five feet from the
south property line and at least seven feet from the rear property line, and that Section 1104.01
requires a five foot setback, which the proposed garage satisfies. There is an existing shed that,
along with the garage, would cover 19.8% of the rear yard area, which satisfies the Code. He
also went through the CUP considerations as listed in the staff report and how they were all
consistent with the Code.
Director Ericson stated that notice was sent to property owners within 350 feet, and that no calls
had been received, but that one letter opposing the request had been received from someone on
Raymond Avenue, and that letter had been included in the Commission’s packet.
Director Ericson recommended approval of the conditional use permit with stipulations and
advised that Resolution 788-05 was attached if the Commission selected that option.
Commissioner Miller asked if the garage would be 19’ by 24’, and Mr. Siercks answered that it
would be. Mr. Siercks also stated it would probably be more like 12 feet away from the
neighbors property rather than seven feet.
Commissioner Miller asked if the shed would remain, and Mr. Siercks stated that it would.
Mounds View Planning Commission March 16, 2005
Regular Meeting Page 3
________________________________________________________________________
Chair Stevenson asked if the long trailer would be housed in the garage, and Mr. Siercks
answered that the trailer couldn’t possibly fit in the garage. Mr. Siercks stated that the race cars
would be in the rear of the garage, and the private cars would be in the front of the garage. There
would be no wall separating them. Mr. Siercks stated that this is the minimum they would need
to fit the four vehicles in the garage.
Commissioner Miller asked whether it was against Code to keep the trailer at the property, and
Mr. Siercks stated that it is not.
Commissioner Zwirn stated that a concern had been raised regarding noise, and he asked
whether the garage would be insulated. Mr. Siercks stated that they would be, which would
reduce noise. Commissioner Zwirn asked whether Mr. Sierck’s son would be doing any outside
repair work, and Mr. Siercks stated that he would not.
MOTION/SECOND: Hegland/Hull. To approve Resolution 788-05 as corrected, a Resolution
Recommending Approval of a Conditional Use Permit to Allow for a 1,032 Square Foot Garage
at 5343 Clifton Drive; Planning Case No. CU2005-001.
Ayes –5 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
Director Ericson stated that the next step would be the public hearing at the first regular City
Council meeting in April.
_____________________________________________________________________________
7. Planning Case DE05-001. Consideration of a Concept Plan for a Hotel Expansion at
The Mermaid located at 2200 County Road 10.
Director Ericson indicated Mr. Hall is proposing an 81 room expansion to the South of the
existing hotel, with an additional 24 rooms possible. He stated this is simply a concept plan and
does not include any grading, drainage, utilities, or landscaping, which would come at a later
point.
Director Ericson pointed out there are two issues associated with this concept plan, which are the
parking spaces and the setback. He stated there are presently 825 parking stalls on the site and
that the hotel expansion would eliminate 50 parking stalls. However, last year the nightclub
closed and was converted into additional conference/banquet space, which eliminated the highest
nighttime demand for parking, and there is excess parking available. Mr. Hall currently leases
part of the parking lot to Metro Transit as an overflow for the Park and Ride lot on County Road
H, and this arrangement could be terminated upon construction of the hotel addition. He stated
that Staff was confident that the site could support the hotel expansion without further expansion
of the parking lot; however, it may be beneficial to have a parking consultant conduct an
assessment for confirmation prior to formal development review plan adoption. He had checked
on the price of such an assessment, which is around $2,000.
Mounds View Planning Commission March 16, 2005
Regular Meeting Page 4
________________________________________________________________________
Commissioner Hegland asked whether he had checked with the Northland Inn regarding what
their parking ratio was.
Director Ericson stated that he had not, but that would be a good idea to do so, as well as to
check with other establishments that had a mixed use such as the Mermaid. Regarding the
setback, the PUD for the Mermaid site allows for a principle structure setback of 50 feet, where
what is normally allowed is 30 feet. The reason it was established at 50 feet was because no one
had anticipated there would be additional expansion to the site. He stated the proposed setback
is from 12 to 30 feet, so at one end of the building it would satisfy the 30-foot setback, but at the
other end where County Road H starts curving it would be down to 12 feet. He stated there have
been discussions about updating the Zoning Code because it was adopted in the 1970’s, and there
have also been discussions about bringing buildings closer to the County Road 10 corridor rather
than moving them back. He stated that because the PUD offers flexibility in what can be
allowed, Staff would not be opposed to the proposed reduced building setback.
Commissioner Miller asked how many spots were being leased for the Park and Ride. Mr. Hall
stated it was between 60 and 70. He stated that his highest use for the parking lot is at night, and
the parking for the Park and Ride is done at 5:00 or 5:30 p.m. He stated the contract with Park
and Ride is year to year, and he wouldn’t mind giving it up if he needed to. Mr. Hall stated he
has never seen the Banquet Center parking more than three quarters full at any time. He stated
that on their very busiest day ever, with 14 banquets going on at once, there were still 100 spots
open in back and 100 spots open in front.
Chair Stevenson stated his concern was that the back lot would get the most pressure from the
105-room hotel expansion. Mr. Hall stated he had never seen a car parked in the first 20 or 30
stalls that parallel County Road H.
Chair Stevenson asked what the total amount of lost parking was due to the expansion, and Mr.
Hall answered that it is 51 spaces.
Director Ericson stated he had not mentioned in his report that there is also an area where
perhaps 20-25 stalls could be striped west of the bowling center.
Mr. Hall stated he also has some shared parking north of the Mermaid with the carpet store, etc.
Commissioner Hegland stated his concern is that the business is in a transition stage of focusing
more on banquets, and he would like to get a point of reference from the Northland Inn and
perhaps others on what their parking ratio is.
Mr. Hall pointed out that the same people staying in the hotel would be the ones attending the
banquets, so there wouldn’t be more cars. He stated that 100 spots have been freed up by the
nightclub closing.
Chair Stevenson stated they could always pass this Resolution with the idea that if they found out
later that the parking wouldn’t be sufficient, they could stop the project at another point.
Mounds View Planning Commission March 16, 2005
Regular Meeting Page 5
________________________________________________________________________
Commissioner Hegland stated he didn’t expect the parking would be an issue, but he would like
a point of reference to confirm it.
Chair Stevenson asked whether this project was time sensitive, and Mr. Hall indicated that it
was.
Commissioner Miller pointed out that the Resolution states in part, “Approval of this general
concept plan does not constitute approval nor obligate approval of the subsequent development
stage plan review for the hotel expansion,” so that would not obligate them in the future.
Commissioner Zwirn stated he had no problem with the parking issue, but several people had
approached him with issues regarding where the expansion is proposed to be placed and issues
regarding noise. He stated there was also an issue regarding why the expansion wasn’t proposed
to be attached to the existing hotel. He asked why he wasn’t putting it where the membrane is
located.
Mr. Hall stated he couldn’t put it by the membrane because the Fire Code requires access all the
way around the membrane.
Commissioner Zwirn asked why he couldn’t put it in the back parking lot.
Mr. Hall stated that had actually been the first design he had brought to his architect, but his
architect had said that it wouldn’t work.
Commissioner Zwirn stated he would like to see that rather than hear it.
Mr. Hall stated he would have 50 to 60 feet of grass, trees, and shrubs after this expansion,
whereas now he only has a very narrow path of grass in front of the hotel.
Chair Stevenson stated that Staff would check into whether 800 parking stalls would be
sufficient.
MOTION/SECOND: Miller/Hegland. To approve Resolution 789-05, a Resolution
Recommending Approval of a Concept Plan for a 105-Room Addition to The Mermaid
Americinn Hotel Facility Located at 2200 County Road 10; Planning Case No. DE05-011.
Commissioner Zwirn asked for clarification since he objected to the layout of this expansion.
Director Ericson stated that this Resolution simply approved the Concept Plan for 105 rooms,
and it may be that things would be changed around by the time it got back to the Planning
Commission for Site Plan Review.
Ayes –5 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
______________________________________________________________________________
Mounds View Planning Commission March 16, 2005
Regular Meeting Page 6
________________________________________________________________________
7. Next Planning Commission Meeting: April 6, 2005.
______________________________________________________________________________
8. Adjournment to Agenda Session
There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the
meeting at 8:00 p.m.
(The meeting immediately adjourned to the Agenda Session)
Respectfully submitted,
Jim Ericson
Community Development Director
Transcribed by:
Sheree Theobald
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.