Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-07-2005 PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting September 7, 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. September 7, 2005. ______________________________________________________________________________ 2. Roll Call Members Present: Commissioners Zwirn, Hegland, Hull, Meehlhause, and Stevenson Absent and Excused: Commissioners Miller and Scotch Also Present: Community Development Director Ericson ________________________________________________________________________ Index to Minutes Page Planning Case VR2005-010. Consideration of a Variance Request for Reduced Parking Lot and Driveway Setback at the PAK Building. 04 Planning Case MI2005-005. Consideration of a Minor Subdivision Request – One Lot into Two. 03 Planning Case VR2005-012. Public Hearing and Consideration of a Variance Request to Replace a Six-Foot Tall Fence in a Front Yard Area. 02 _______________________________________________________________________ 3. Approve Minutes July 6, 2005. July 20, 2005. August 3, 2005. MOTION/SECOND: Zwirn/Hull. To approve the Minutes of the July 6, 2005, July 20, 2005, and August 3, 2005 regular Planning Commission meetings as slightly amended. Mounds View Planning Commission September 7, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 2 ________________________________________________________________________ Ayes –5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. ______________________________________________________________________________ 4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda None. ______________________________________________________________________________ 5. Planning Case VR2005-010. Consideration of a Variance Request for Reduced Parking Lot and Driveway Setback at the PAK Building. This item was considered later in the agenda. ______________________________________________________________________________ 6. Planning Case MI2005-005. Consideration of a Minor Subdivision Request – One Lot into Two. This item was considered later in the agenda. ______________________________________________________________________________ 7. Planning Case VR2005-012. Public Hearing and Consideration of a Variance Request to Replace a Six-Foot Tall Fence in a Front Yard Area. Community Development Director Ericson reviewed the staff report indicating the applicants, Donald and Christine Gullickson, 7685 Groveland Road, are requesting a variance to replace an existing non-conforming fence in the front yard of their property. The existing privacy fence has deteriorated beyond repair. Director Ericson stated for approval of the request there needs to be a demonstrated hardship or practical difficulty associated with the property. The property is on a busy roadway and sits six feet below the improved grade of County Road I. The applicant seeks only to replace what is present. Director Ericson noted the Planning Commission has not received any letters from neighbors opposing the requested variance. He recommended the Planning Commission approve the variance as requested. Chair Stevenson stated normally there would be additional questions with regard to putting a fence in a front yard but due to the elevation issue this request is unique. Chair Stevenson opened the public hearing at 7:06 p.m. Chair Stevenson asked if there is any area that is currently not a six-foot fence, and if so, it should be addressed at this time. Director Ericson stated yes, where the picket fence is; however, Mounds View Planning Commission September 7, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 3 ________________________________________________________________________ the owners are tentatively proposing to put a six-foot fence there in the future which would then tie off the back yard and provide closure. He added this is not part of the original request but the resolution gives the owners flexibility in the future. Mr. Gullickson stated the picket fence is not presently being replaced due to finances; however, replacement is speculative for the future. Director Ericson stated the resolution provides for the future area where a six-foot fence could be added. Commissioner Hegland asked if this would require another permit. Director Ericson stated yes, a zoning permit for the new fence would be required. Chair Stevenson noted if a six-foot fence were added to this area the request would not come before the Commission because the area will have already been approved. Chair Stevenson closed the public hearing at 7:13 p.m. MOTION/SECOND: Hegland/Meehlhause. To approve Resolution 812-05, a Resolution Recommending Approval of a Variance Request to Replace a Six-Foot Tall Fence in a Front Yard Area; Planning Case No. VR2005-012. Ayes –5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. ______________________________________________________________________________ 6. Planning Case MI2005-005. Consideration of a Minor Subdivision Request – One Lot into Two. Community Development Director Ericson reviewed the staff report indicating the applicant, Donald Olson, 2933 Oakwood Drive, is requesting approval to subdivide his lot located at 7851 Spring Lake Road. He would like to add the new lot to his Oakwood Drive parcel to provide more backyard space. Director Ericson stated the property at 7851 Spring Lake Road would be divided into four proposed tracts. Tract A would be deeded to 7865 Spring Lake Road; Tract B would be deeded to the City for right of way; Tract C would be the remainder of 7851 Spring Lake Road; and Tract D would be added to 2933 Oakwood Drive. He noted all zoning requirements have been satisfied; Tract D would not be considered buildable because it would not front an improved street. He added the subdivision would not result in additional dwelling units nor will it intensify development; therefore, Staff recommends no park dedication fees be applied to this subdivision. He reviewed the conditions of the minor subdivision. Director Ericson noted the Planning Commission has not received any letters from neighbors opposing the subdivision request. He recommended the Planning Commission approve the minor subdivision as requested. Mounds View Planning Commission September 7, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 4 ________________________________________________________________________ Chair Stevenson asked who owns the lot to be split. Director Ericson stated Mr. Olson owns it. Chair Stevenson stated Mr. Olson, as owner, should be clear in the record. Director Ericson replied this would be added to the resolution, first whereas, directly after Mr. Olson’s name. Commissioner Hegland asked if 7851 Spring Lake Road is rental property. Mr. Olson stated he purchased the property in April or May of this year and is currently renovating it. He added he intends to sell it after renovations and the pending approval of the lot split. MOTION/SECOND: Meehlhause/Hull. To approve Resolution 811-05, a Resolution Recommending Approval of a Minor Subdivision Request – One Lot into Two, as Amended; Planning Case No. MI2005-005. Ayes –5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. ______________________________________________________________________________ 5. Planning Case VR2005-010. Consideration of a Variance Request for Reduced Parking Lot and Driveway Setback at the PAK Building. Community Development Director Ericson reviewed the staff report indicating the subject property is a small commercial lot improved with a one-story concrete block building (the “PAK” Building). A variance is being requested for a reduced parking lot and driveway setback around the periphery of the lot to promote positive drainage and to provide better maneuvering of vehicles. Director Ericson indicated Mr. Perrozzi has provided two different options produced by Loucks McLagen, Velmeir’s civil engineer for the CVS project. Both options mitigate the sharp elevation change between the two properties by grading toward the PAK Building. This creates a two percent slope, or a six-inch drop in the span of twenty feet to the building. Director Ericson stated for approval of the request there needs to be a demonstrated hardship or practical difficulty associated with the property. The lot has very little change of elevation over the property which causes difficulties with stormwater runoff. The poor grade is also a condition of the site. Additionally, if subject to the five-foot setback, the width of the drive aisle on the northeast and east side of the building would not be sufficient for emergency vehicle access, which the fire marshal deems to be a minimum of 24 feet wide. Director Ericson noted Staff believes there is sufficient hardship associated with this property to warrant a variance request to allow for a two-foot driveway setback along the northeast and east property lines. Chair Stevenson asked if the two-foot setback would change if the 24 feet were maintained on the east side. Director Ericson stated the two-foot setback should be adequate to address the issue. Mounds View Planning Commission September 7, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 5 ________________________________________________________________________ Rick Perrozzi, Building Manager, 2832 County Road 10, stated the front setback could remain as is and be blacktopped; however, on the east side the request is for as much flexibility as possible – a zero setback is preferred. Chair Stevenson asked what would happen with these two feet, if granted. Mr. Perrozzi stated they would be blacktopped. Commissioner Hegland asked if there would be a curb. Mr. Perrozzi stated yes. Chair Stevenson stated a curb would deter water from the CVS property. Commissioner Hegland stated if there is a zero setback snow may be placed on the CVS property. Director Ericson noted in the case of substantial snowfalls there is plenty of room at the back of the PAK property to pile snow. Commissioner Zwirn asked about the engineering reports. Mr. Perrozzi stated the engineers are from the CVS project; they are trying to correct the problem. He added he is in the process of getting an independent engineering firm to dispute the grading and stormwater flow because the proposal would allow water to collect against the building. Chair Stevenson noted the Commission did not act on the request at the last meeting due to an unknown outcome of a proposed meeting later in the week between Mr. Perrozzi and Velmeir. He asked about the outcome of that meeting. Mr. Perrozzi replied the meeting never occurred. He added several days and times were offered; however, Velmeir initially did not return calls and would not meet him at the job site. Chair Stevenson noted the fire marshal indicated a 24-foot minimum width; therefore, he does not see any reason to allow more than the two-foot setback. Commissioner Zwirn asked if the stakes, depicted in the photographic documentation, represents the lot line and, if so, is it two feet west to the curb. Mr. Perrozzi stated the stakes represent the lot line. He added the lot line would move two more feet to the west. Commissioner Hegland asked where is the five-foot setback. Director Ericson stated the majority of the CVS curb is five feet from the property line; however, it is closer where the storm drain was installed.. Commissioner Hegland asked what Velmeir would do with the part that goes into their property. Mr. Perrozzi stated they are going to tear it out. Chair Stevenson stated more pervious surfaces such as landscaping should provide for less water coming to the building. Mr. Perrozzi stated an extra two feet would provide more chance water would run away from the building. Mounds View Planning Commission September 7, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 6 ________________________________________________________________________ Commissioner Zwirn asked if the sidewalk next to the building would be removed. Mr. Perrozzi replied it would be removed and replaced with landscaping. Commissioner Zwirn stated he is inclined to approve a zero lot line because there would be a wider area for traffic control. He added several community members want to see the property enhanced. The stumbling block has been Velmeir and if Mr. Perrozzi is willing to do this on his own, the Commission should work with him. Commissioner Hull asked if there are retailers waiting to rent the building. Mr. Perrozzi replied there have been inquires but all want the parking lot done first. Chair Stevenson stated he does not see the rationale for a zero lot line. He added lot lines are arbitrary and if there is a few inch mistake there could be problems later. Mr. Perrozzi asked if there is a concern regarding setting precedence. Chair Stevenson replied absolutely. Mr. Perrozzi asked if he presented a zero-foot setback plan developed by a licensed engineer would the Commission be open to this plan. Commissioner Hegland stated he does not see how a zero-foot setback plan would make a difference. Mr. Perrozzi again asked if the opposition to a zero-foot setback is about setting precedence. Commissioner Hegland stated setting precedence is an issue as well as snow removal. Mr. Perrozzi stated the snow would drain into his property. MOTION/SECOND: Hegland/__. To approve Resolution 810-05, a Resolution Recommending Approval of a Variance Request for Reduced Parking Lot and Driveway Setback at the PAK Building; Planning Case No. VR2005-010. Mr. Perrozzi asked if the proposed resolution were passed could the plans be changed later if it was found that he could not work within the confines of the plan. Commissioner Hegland stated an applicant must work within the confines of the resolution, if passed. He added without a presented plan from a licensed engineer that two feet would make a difference; a zero-foot setback cannot be approved. He suggested action be postponed so a plan could be presented. Mr. Perrozzi stated he is looking for flexibility from the Commission. He noted he would prefer not to spend additional dollars on another possible resolution in the future if, after approving tonight’s resolution, he could not work within the confines of the plan. He added if the Commission is not willing to consider a zero-foot setback, presenting another plan would not be worthwhile. No second, motion fails. Mounds View Planning Commission September 7, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 7 ________________________________________________________________________ Commissioner Zwirn asked if the Commission would be willing to split the difference and pass a resolution with a one-foot setback. He added this way if the lot lines were off by a few inches a one-foot setback would eliminate any problems in the future. Commissioner Meehlhause stated he agrees a zero-foot setback should not be granted; however, would be willing to compromise with a one-foot setback. Commissioner Hull stated he would agree to a one-foot setback MOTION/SECOND: Zwirn/Hull. To approve Resolution 810-05, a Resolution Recommending Approval of a Variance Request for Reduced Parking Lot and Driveway Setback at the PAK Building, as Amended; Planning Case No. VR2005-010. Director Ericson noted changes to the resolution, from three feet to four feet, which includes the resolution title, whereas number eight, and the “finally resolved” paragraph. He added the site plan (Exhibit A) would also be modified to show this one-foot setback. Ayes –5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. ______________________________________________________________________________ 8. Other Planning Activity. Director Ericson stated starting in October, and for the following six months, all City Hall happenings, except meetings, will be relocated to the community center while City Hall is being renovated. He noted all meetings would be relocated to the New Brighton City Hall; however, there is a conflict for the Planning Commission with the first Wednesday of each month. He requested the Commission make a determination whether to meet at the City of Arden Hills, to cancel these meetings if there is nothing to consider, or to meet on the second Wednesday of the month instead of the first. He added it would be inconvenient to have the Planning Commission meetings at different halls. Chair Stevenson asked if the community center couldn’t be used due to the local TV coverage problem. Director Ericson stated it would be hard to set up the meeting, i.e. individuals would need to hold cameras the quality of the audio and video would be a problem. He added City Council feels strongly the meetings should be broadcast. Commissioner Hegland asked if the second Wednesday of the month would work for Council action. Director Ericson stated it would because Staff reports cannot be turned around that quickly. Director Ericson suggested another option, that the Commission meet the second and fourth Wednesday of each month instead. Chair Stevenson, with Commission agreement, stated the Commission will meet on the second and fourth Wednesday of the month starting in October but may be adjusted each month. Mounds View Planning Commission September 7, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 8 ________________________________________________________________________ Commissioner Meehlhause asked where is the City Hall for New Brighton. Director Ericson stated directions and a map would be provided with the next Commission packet. Commissioner Hegland asked if the fourth Wednesday of the month would work for everyone. Director Ericson stated he believes so but will verify again with the City of New Brighton. Director Ericson introduced Heidi Heller, the new planning associate. Ms. Heller stated she recently worked in economic development with the St. Paul Chamber of Commerce, and before that worked in West St. Paul doing a variety of relevant duties. ______________________________________________________________________________ 9. Next Planning Commission Meeting: September 21, 2005. ______________________________________________________________________________ 10. Adjournment to Agenda Session There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the meeting at 8:06 p.m. (The meeting immediately adjourned to the Agenda Session) Respectfully submitted, Jim Ericson Community Development Director Transcribed by: Cheryl Felix TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.