Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-16-2005 PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting November 16, 2005 New Brighton City Hall 803 Old Highway 8 NW, New Brighton, MN 55112 ______________________________________________________________________________ 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Chair Stevenson at 7:00 p.m. November 16, 2005. ______________________________________________________________________________ 2. Roll Call Members Present: Commissioners Miller, Zwirn, Hegland, Hull, Meehlhause, Scotch, and Stevenson Absent and Excused: None. Also Present: Community Development Director Ericson and Planning Associate Heller ______________________________________________________________________________ Index to Minutes Page Planning Case ZC2005-002. Consideration of a Rezoning Request From R-1 Single Family Residential to R-2 Single & Two Family Residential 02 Planning Case ZC2005-003. Consideration of a Rezoning Request To Silverview Plaza from B-2 Limited Business to B-3 Highway Business 06 ______________________________________________________________________________ 3. Approve Minutes October 5, 2005. Community Development Director Ericson stated the minutes were reviewed at the last Agenda Session but not approved. He added per Commissioner Hegland’s request, he reviewed the video tape of the meeting and made changes to reflect a word for word transcription for the passage in question. Commissioner Hegland thanked Director Ericson for reviewing the tape and stated he supports the revised language as it more accurately represents what was said. Mounds View Planning Commission November 16, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 2 ________________________________________________________________________ MOTION/SECOND: Hegland/Zwirn. To approve the Minutes of the October 5, 2005 regular Planning Commission meetings as slightly amended. Ayes –7 Nays – 0 Motion carried. ______________________________________________________________________________ 4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda None. ______________________________________________________________________________ 5. Planning Case ZC2005-002. Consideration of a Rezoning Request From R-1 Single Family Residential to R-2 Single & Two Family Residential Planning Associate Heller reviewed the staff report indicating the applicant, JoAnn Colleen, 2617 County Road I, is requesting to rezone her property from R-1, Single Family Residential, to R-2, Single and Two-Family Residential. The applicant previously constructed an expansion to her home to provide additional living space for family members; however, the scope of work was modified after plan approval, which resulted in the construction of an additional dwelling unit. After code violation notification, the applicant applied for the rezoning. Planning Associate Heller stated according to City Code, in order to approve a rezoning request, it must be determined that the zoning designation would be consistent with the City’s comp plan and would not be detrimental to the neighborhood or adversely affect any adjoining properties. The request is inconsistent with the comp plan; however, there are existing twin homes within a block of the subject property. Introduction of a more intensive zoning on this property may not be inappropriate given the surrounding land uses. The property owner resides in the main home and plans to use the second unit above the garage as a rental unit. Planning Associate Heller noted this is a public hearing. She requested the Planning Commission consider the testimony and feedback and either recommend approval or denial of the rezoning request. Commissioner Miller asked if there was a change in the comp plan. She also asked about parking. Planning Associate Heller replied they sent out public hearing notices and received one vocal opposition by a resident. She added there has been concern in the past about the number of vehicles on the property, but they have a decent size driveway so there should be no street parking needed. The comp plan, she indicated, would need to be amended. Chair Stevenson asked about expansion of the driveway. Planning Associate Heller replied she does not believe it will be expanded. Commissioner Hegland asked if rezoning could affect the ability for them to change parking in the future. Planning Associate Heller replied no. Mounds View Planning Commission November 16, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 3 ________________________________________________________________________ Commissioner Zwirn asked when the applicant applied for a permit were the plans considered code compliant. Director Ericson replied when the permit was issued it was consistent with code; living space above a garage is permitted. He added at some point the plans changed by the addition of a full kitchen. Commissioner Zwirn asked if the dwelling would have a separate address. Director Ericson replied it could, but at this point an additional address is not being considered. Commissioner Zwirn stated he is concerned how the project got from A to B without supervision or instruction from the City. Director Ericson replied when it was discovered that there was an additional dwelling the applicant was notified by Staff. The inspector also notified the applicant that the dwelling would need to be brought back into compliance by removing the kitchen plumbing or rezoning the property. Chair Stevenson asked if the addition of the kitchen makes it R-2. Director Ericson replied it is a grey area; a separate access off the back of the addition helps make it an additional dwelling unit, also. Commissioner Zwirn stated a grey area gives leeway to an individual. He added the submitted plans were reviewed and approved and upon inspection it was found the applicant was doing something different; therefore, this indicates intent so he is not inclined to support the rezoning if deception was involved. Commissioner Scotch asked if plans were submitted to the City and changed later. In other words, was the kitchen added later. Ms. Colleen stated originally the addition was put on the garage for her son, wife, and their two children to move into because the house was becoming crowded. The plans submitted were what she asked for; a family room, two bedrooms, a bathroom, and a bar area. When her son and family moved in in July she put in cupboards around the proposed wet bar and her daughter had a stove so she put that in, too. She could not get the six-foot bar from the basement into the new addition so her family friend built a counter with wheels which was later secured to the floor. Her son later received a job up north and his family moved out. Ms. Colleen provided pictures of the finished construction. Chair Stevenson asked if the dwelling was intended for family. He also asked if the purpose now is to rent it out. Ms. Colleen replied the intention was family and she is unsure if she will rent it. Commissioner Scotch asked if the kitchen was part of the plans. Ms. Colleen replied no, it made a difference when the cupboards and stove were added. Commissioner Hegland asked what it would take to bring it back to an R-1. Ms. Colleen replied she was told the counter, stove, sink, and cupboards would need to be removed. Commissioner Meehlhause replied he can understand having cupboards if there is a bar. Mounds View Planning Commission November 16, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 4 ________________________________________________________________________ Commissioner Zwirn asked if the area has a common entrance to the rest of the house and if so is the doorway locked. Ms. Colleen replied yes, there is a stairway inside the house and it can be locked now. Commissioner Zwirn stated his concern is that it would be an income producing property. Commissioner Scotch asked if there are exterior stairs. Ms. Colleen replied yes, in case of fire. Commissioner Zwirn asked if anything has been done with the garage ceiling and, if so, what is there now. Ms. Colleen replied the top of the garage had to be ripped off and has been sheet rocked and insulated. Chair Stevenson asked if the ceiling was part of the original plan. Ms. Colleen replied yes. Commissioner Miller asked if the square footage has changed. Ms. Colleen replied no. Commissioner Scotch stated her main concern, if rezoned, is the parking situation. She added it would not be hard to bring it back to single family. Commissioner Zwirn asked if the plumbing is tied into the main house or if it is separate. He also asked if the utilities are metered separately. Ms. Colleen replied there is a separate furnace but the rest is tied in with the main house; they are not metered separately. Chair Stevenson stated there are a lot of multi-family homes on County Road I. He added it looks like it is well built; however, the number of cars on the property has been an issue in the past and will be again. Ms. Colleen replied it shouldn’t be. She added her other son collects cars and they are mostly his. Chair Stevenson asked if anything was not up to code. He also asked when was the last inspection. Director Ericson replied there are no specific R-2 code requirements; however, there may be some housing code maintenance issues such as licensing as a multi-family home. Ms. Colleen replied the last inspection was in August. Chair Stevenson stated he is concerned with the grey area and there should be more distinction for R-2. Director Ericson replied the distinction has to start with intent; any property owner can lease their basement or rent out a room, but if a person has separate living facilities that are distinct it is considered a separate dwelling. In other words, the distinction becomes a separate space, eating area, or cooking facilities, even if there is one electrical or water service. Commissioner Meehlhause stated the interior entrance seems not to apply then. Commissioner Scotch stated the issue is the possible intent to rent because the owner may need financial assistance. She added the other issue is the number of cars in the driveway. Ms. Colleen replied she would rather have a family member move in. Mounds View Planning Commission November 16, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 5 ________________________________________________________________________ Commissioner Zwirn referenced picture 13 showing bath facilities and asked if there is a shower or bath. Ms. Colleen replied it has a shower/bath combination. Chair Stevenson asked how many of the cars are her sons. He added he would like to see an approval tied to a maximum number of vehicles allowed otherwise someone else could move in and have more vehicles; however, this is not possible. Ms. Colleen replied they are all his but two, which she owns and she is planning to sell one of the two. Commissioner Hegland stated the issue changed when it went from a family member living there to being able to rent it out. He asked if there is a refrigerator and, if so, was it part of the original plans with the bar. He also asked if there is a range hood. Ms. Colleen replied the refrigerator was part of the original plans. She added that a range hood was installed. Commissioner Hegland stated as far as meeting code for the original request, the only real problem is the stove and range hood. Director Ericson replied that is correct. Commissioner Miller stated she has no problem with the R-2 designation due to the location and similarly zoned properties on the same street. Commissioner Hull asked if there are any driveways besides in front of the garage. Ms. Colleen replied there is a driveway in front of the garage with a turnaround; room for four vehicles. Chair Stevenson opened the public hearing at 7:37 p.m. Barbara Haake, 3024 County Road I, noted the property is R-1 and asked how is the zoning within the comp plan, and would it be a spot rezoning. Chair Stevenson replied that the comp plan would need to be amended to reflect the new zoning. Commissioner Zwirn asked why the one resident verbally opposed the rezoning. Planning Associate Heller replied it was due to past issues with the property and the amount of cars. Commissioner Miller stated if the property stays R-1 they could still have as many cars. Chair Stevenson stated there would be no additional driveways and no change in the amount of allowable parking with R-2. Commissioner Hull asked what would happen if the applicant moves, does it stay R-2. Chair Stevenson replied yes, it would remain R-2. Commissioner Scotch stated an R-2 usually has two housing units. She asked if a stipulation could be added regarding the number of cars in the driveway. Chair Stevenson replied no. Chair Stevenson closed the public hearing at 7:42 p.m. Mounds View Planning Commission November 16, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 6 ________________________________________________________________________ MOTION/SECOND: Miller/Hull. To approve Resolution 819-05, a Resolution Recommending Approval of a Rezoning Request From R-1 Single Family Residential to R-2 Single & Two Family Residential; Planning Case No. ZC2005-002. Ayes – 5 Nays – 2 (Hegland, Zwirn) Motion carried. Commissioner Hegland stated he believes in not increasing density in housing and this would do that. Commissioner Zwirn stated he is not clear the intent was not prior to the action. ______________________________________________________________________________ 6. Planning Case ZC2005-003. Consideration of a Rezoning Request to Silverview Plaza from B-2 Limited Business to B-3 Highway Business Community Development Director Ericson reviewed the staff report indicating the applicant, Kraus Anderson, is requesting a rezoning of the property located at 2544-2574 County Road 10, commonly known as Silverview Plaza, from B-2, Limited Business, to B-3, Highway Business. Rezoning would allow for all uses within the B-2 district plus more intense commercial uses such as restaurants, auto parts and auto repair, motels or hotels, and gas stations. Currently, 45% of the retail area is vacant. Director Ericson stated according to City Code, in order to approve a rezoning request, it must be determined the zoning designation would be consistent with the City’s comp plan and would not be detrimental to the neighborhood or adversely affect any adjoining properties. The request would not be inconsistent with the comp plan, which designates this area as “Community Commercial”; however, the request may not conform to the subjective adverse effects test. At full capacity, traffic circulation at the Plaza becomes more problematic because there is no direct access out to County Road 10 and only one shared right-in access. Additionally, there may be inadequate parking if the Plaza is at full capacity and depending upon the tenant mix. Director Ericson stated that the Planning Commission received three letters from residents noting concerns such as traffic, noise, and pedestrian safety, and a resident petition in opposition of the rezoning. Commissioner Miller stated a letter from Kraus Anderson noted some possible businesses have been turned away like a hardware store, and asked if it is because they repaired lawnmowers. Director Ericson replied a service aspect pushes it into a CUP, where there could be noise and adverse effects. He added some businesses turned away would be allowed with the rezoning. Chair Stevenson asked how Subway qualifies in B-2. Director Ericson replied the code was amended years ago to allow “delicatessens” which do not have full cooking facilities. Chair Stevenson opened the public hearing at 7:56 p.m. Mounds View Planning Commission November 16, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 7 ________________________________________________________________________ Mike Gross, Property Manager, Kraus Anderson, stated other restaurants have been interested, such as a Chinese restaurant, but have been denied because they are not a deli. He added they are not getting the correct tenant mix because in the past tenants have been more office related, which does not bring in other customers to the center. He added several tenants are not making it due to traffic counts. Char Stevenson asked if they feel a B-3 designation would fill the space. Mr. Gross replied this would be the goal and would give them more options. Mike Korsh, Asset Manager, Kraus Anderson, stated restaurants and a hardware store are examples of what they would like to have. He added the City would have a fail-safe regarding tenants because if the zoning were B-3, many tenants would be reviewed for a CUP. Chair Stevenson stated the applicant is having a hard time filling the space as B-2, but as B-3 if the place is filled there may be a parking issue as well as a noise issue. Mr. Gross replied common requirements for parking are 1 stall to 100 square feet, and most cities are looking for 1 stall to 200 square feet because huge lots are not getting full. He added the school located in the plaza encompasses 25% of the mall but uses maybe 10 parking spots. Also, Dominos Pizza only uses a few spots for their delivery trucks; there is no patron parking. Chair Stevenson stated if B-3 and tenants change there could be a parking problem. In the past there was an issue with more tenants. He added he is not seeing where the parking situation has been remedied; therefore, patrons could be parking elsewhere. Mr. Korsh replied typically, parking is 5 stalls per 1000 square feet. When the facility was built it was the tendency to over park. He added tenants self-regulate their parking and will not lease space in a building that already has a full parking lot. Chair Stevenson asked if they have other centers of this size with this little parking. Mr. Korsh replied yes, most of them are this way. Chair Stevenson asked what is the parking ratio now. Director Ericson replied 1 stall to 200 square feet. He added currently, based on codes and City requirements they are short about 59 stalls. He added for places such as malls the City comes up with a generic parking requirement, based on the type of zoning and tenants planned. There is no way to predict what will be each tenant’s parking requirements. He agreed that in the past, there was a tendency to over create parking. He stated there is validity to the claim that tenants seem to self-regulate. He added the Plaza has 172 stalls; however many of these are in the back which no one uses and are not very accessible. Chair Stevenson stated he has a hard time including those stalls in the back. Mr. Korsh replied these stalls are typically for employees. Commissioner Scotch asked what is vacant now and noted there have been vacancies for the past five years. She added she would like to see more traffic there, but would not want to see car Mounds View Planning Commission November 16, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 8 ________________________________________________________________________ repairs. Mr. Gross replied 45% is currently vacant and agreed it has been consistent although they have rented to a few businesses on a short-term basis. Chair Stevenson asked in B-2 what would be some of the allowed uses without a CUP. Director Ericson replied probably small restaurants and stores that do not do repairs such as grocery. Commissioner Hegland asked about possible access off County Road 10. Director Ericson replied no, Ramsey County probably would not allow access. Mr. Gross replied he contacted the County regarding this and received the same answer. Commissioner Zwirn asked if they are price competitive. Mr. Gross replied they are at or below market at about eight dollars per square foot, depending upon the plan and use. Jim Stimmler, Kraus Anderson representative, stated he has been involved with leasing the center for the past 10 years, and has been very aggressive in getting people in. He added they want to fill the Plaza with quality tenants, which would make it a stronger center and keep it updated. Dwaine Straight, 2718 Lake Court Drive, stated the area was zoned the way it is because of noise and traffic and he does not see anything that has changed to approve rezoning. He added he heard a rumor one of the plans could be an auto muffler shop, and noted there is two close by so he is not sure it would be successful or how much noise, traffic, and parking it would create. Chair Stevenson replied an auto muffler shop would require a CUP and likely not be approved. Mr. Straight stated at the handicapped building a lot of folks are out on nice days and if there is more parking and traffic this could be a problem for them. Commissioner Scotch replied she has noticed them trying to cross County Road 10 and that this issue should be addressed soon. Mark Gola, Ham Lake, stated he is looking to open a Meineke franchise at the Plaza. He added there would be one door in the back where vehicles would be brought in and worked on with closed doors, they would require no more than 10 parking stalls, and would close at 6:00 p.m. Commissioner Scotch asked if he has other stores now. She also asked how much space he was looking at and if the door would be a roll up. Mr. Gola replied there are several Meineke stores and indicated various cities. He added he is looking at leasing the end cap, 4,900 square feet, and the door would be a roll up. Commissioner Hegland asked where he would put scrap. Mr. Gola replied there would be a separate dumpster for it. He added the shop would help the other business because patrons could drop off their car and go to other shops. Commissioner Miller asked what information did residents have before they signed the petition. Director Ericson replied the residents received copies of the notice indicating the proposed change, what the redesignation would entail, and examples of what could be permitted in B-3. Mounds View Planning Commission November 16, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 9 ________________________________________________________________________ Commissioner Miller asked about the opposition of increased traffic in the petition. Norma Straight, 2718 Lake Court Drive, replied they were told at a townhome association meeting that a Meineke may be moving in, that is why they all signed the petition. Commissioner Hull asked if they would be against a restaurant or a quieter business. Mrs. Straight replied no, but would be opposed to noise or more traffic. Commissioner Zwirn asked what was the issue with the Chinese restaurant not being able to lease. Director Ericson replied they were above and beyond what would be defined as a deli. He added regardless of the action tonight, the Planning Commission could create a B-2 restaurant provision. Commissioner Zwirn asked how a restaurant differs from Subway or Dominos. Director Ericson replied the delineation is items such as the stove and burners. He added Subway and Dominos do not really have cooking facilities other than an oven. Chair Stevenson asked if the designation was left as B-2 could an individual with a CUP allow certain things to go in that is not B-2. Director Ericson replied only if it were identified as a potential conditional use in the district already. Commissioner Miller asked if a Meineke, along with Mr. Gola’s explanation, changed their mind. Mrs. Straight replied no. Mr. Korsh stated a B-2 with additional uses would be helpful. Chair Stevenson replied the Commission would like to explore this possibility. Chair Stevenson closed the public hearing at 8:29 p.m. MOTION/SECOND: Zwirn/Stevenson. To approve Resolution 820-05, a Resolution Recommending Denial of a Rezoning Request to Silverview Plaza from B-2 Limited Business to B-3 Highway Business; Planning Case No. ZC2005-003. Ayes –7 Nays – 0 Motion carried. Barbara Haake, 3024 County Road I, stated she approves of the motion and the consideration of B-2 with CUPs. She added there are so many empty spaces along County Road 10. She requested suggestions later be explored regarding what could be added into the Plaza. Chair Stevenson replied Staff can work with the applicant to encourage business growth. ______________________________________________________________________________ 7. Next Planning Commission Meeting: December 21, 2005. ______________________________________________________________________________ 8. Adjournment to Agenda Session Mounds View Planning Commission November 16, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 10 ________________________________________________________________________ There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the meeting at 8:32 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.