Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-20-2004 PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting October 20, 2004 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., October 20, 2004. ______________________________________________________________________________ 2. Roll Call Members Present: Commissioners Miller, Stevenson, Scotch, Hegland, Zwirn, and Meehlhause Members Absent: None. Also Present: Community Development Director Ericson and Planner Prososki ________________________________________________________________________ Index to Minutes Page Planning Case CU2004-005 2 Pulled from Agenda Planning Case VR2004-010 2 Variance for Reduced Side Setback for Garage at 2901 County Road H Planning Case VR2004-011 2 Variance for Reduced Front Setback for Parking Area and Variance From Minimum Lot Size Requirements for a Proposed Automobile Sales Lot at 2320 Highway 10 and 5260 O’Connell Drive _____________________________________________________________________________ 3. Approve Minutes a. September 15, 2004 Mounds View Planning Commission October 20, 2004 Regular Meeting Page 2 ________________________________________________________________________ MOTION/SECOND: Miller/Zwirn. To Approve the Planning Commission Minutes for September 15, 2004 as Presented. Ayes – 6 Nays – 0 Motion carried. ______________________________________________________________________________ 4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda None. ______________________________________________________________________________ 5. Planning Case CU2004-005 CUP Leon Theis This Item removed from the Agenda at the request of Applicants. To be discussed November 3, 2004. ______________________________________________________________________________ 6. Planning Case VR2004-010 Variance for Reduced Side Setback for Garage Planner Prososki indicated that the applicants have requested a variance from the side setback of three (3) feet. In addition, the applicants are requesting a variance to exceed the maximum percentage of allowable accessory building area to cover 22% of the rear yard. Planner Prososki explained that this is a corner lot with two front setbacks making the rear and side yards too small for a garage. She then explained that the applicants have proposed to construct a one car garage that is 14.5 feet wide and 39 feet deep to allow for storage behind the parking area. Commissioner Meehlhause asked what portion of the structure would need to be removed to make it conform to the size requirements. Planner Prososki indicated that it would be approximately two feet Chair Stevenson stated he felt that reducing the size would compromise the ability to allow for storage. MOTION/SECOND: Hegland/Scotch. To Approve Resolution 773-04, a Resolution Approving a Variance to Allow for a Two-Foot Side Yard Setback and a Variance to Exceed the Maximum Percentage Of Allowable Accessory Building Area for a Garage at 2901 County Road H as Amended. Ayes – 6 Nays – 0 Motion carried. ______________________________________________________________________________ Mounds View Planning Commission October 20, 2004 Regular Meeting Page 3 ________________________________________________________________________ 7. Consideration of Variance Request for Reduced Front Setback for Parking Area and a Variance from the Minimum Lot Size Requirement for a Proposed Automobile Sales Lot at 2320 Highway 10 and 5260 O’Connell Drive Planner Prososki reviewed the request with the Commission and explained that Staff feels that the variance for the parking is supportable but would recommend denial of both variances if the Commission is not able to determine hardship for the variance from the minimum lot size. She further commented that Staff reviewed the request and is not able to find supportable hardship for allowing the variance from the minimum lot size. Planner Prososki indicated that Staff was contacted by many residents on this request and most were opposed to the proposal. She then said that some were not opposed but were concerned that the residential area be taken into consideration. She further commented that the biggest concern for Staff is it does not meet the lot minimum and Staff does not feel that the hardship criteria has been met and recommends denial. Chair Stevenson opened the public hearing at 7:13 p.m. Chair Stevenson asked the developer to explain how this is not the typical used car lot. Gary Nordness, representing the applicant, indicated he has been working with CU Companies on several projects in New Brighton. He then said that CU is owned by 64 credit unions and, before anything is done they are looking into the variances and how to work with the neighbors to ensure that they will not be negatively impacted by this proposal. Mr. Nordness indicated this is different from a typical car lot with operational hours from 10:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. during weekdays and closed by 6:00 p.m. on weekends. He then said that after hours lighting would be below normal levels with downcast lighting similar to an office building rather than that of a dealership. Mr. Nordness indicated they do not, other than detailing, intend to do any service nor have an indoor show floor at the location. He then said that there would be a minimal amount of pre- owned newer model cars and new cars. Mr. Nordness explained that they would fence or screen from O’Connell Drive and move the site forward to lessen the impact to the neighborhood. He then said that the building will be brick and stone and they were looking at a monument sign for the property and a sign on the face of building. Mr. Nordness indicated that CU is proud of what they are doing through its credit members for keeping a clean look and it will be shielded on two sides and well landscaped. He then said that they intend to meet with and incorporate as many changes into the plan to accommodate the neighbors as is possible. Chair Stevenson asked how many cars would be on the lot at any one time. Mounds View Planning Commission October 20, 2004 Regular Meeting Page 4 ________________________________________________________________________ Mr. Nordness estimated from 60 to 67. Mike Frankki of 5259 O’Connell Drive indicated he was speaking on behalf of the neighborhood and the neighborhood does not feel this would be beneficial to the neighborhood or Mounds View and it is aesthetically unappealing. He then said they would prefer something else done on that site because, regardless of what it is or is promised to be, car dealerships are not pleasing to look at. Mr. Frankki indicated he is concerned with a car dealership and possible run-off from washing of vehicles and it takes out a stretch of woods that is a buffer zone from Highway 10 coming to the neighborhood. He then asked the Commission to say no as it is too large of a use for the proposed location. Doug Donely of 5210 O’Connell Drive indicated he has young children and he is concerned about the increase of use of the space for commercial. He then said that they bought on this street because the areas were all zoned residential and this request would require a rezoning of the residential portion on O’Connell to commercial and that would be a hardship to the neighborhood and take away the buffer of trees they currently have. He further commented that he was just in a meeting and one of the participants is a psychiatrist and had gone to a meeting earlier where they were discussing the effects of intense urban light on sleep patterns and that the amount of radiant light from businesses are detrimental to physical health. Mr. Donely indicated he likes looking out and seeing trees and, if approved, there is a significant amount of foliage buffer that would be lost causing an increase of light. Mr. Donely indicated they are concerned about increased traffic and issues that would cause on the street. He then asked the Commission to deny the request for the variances. Ron Bakke of 5250 Jeffrey Drive said he agrees with the neighbors that he does not see much value in another car lot being brought in. He then said that they are not pleased with Saturn because of the lights and paging noise from telephone calls and they would not like a similar situation in the neighborhood. He further said he does not see the value that it adds to the community. Chair Stevenson asked for clarification on the paging comment regarding Saturn. Mr. Bakke indicated that they can hear the paging distinctly. Rick Bagwill of 5260 Jeffrey Drive said he agrees with the neighbors. He then said that his concern is he bought his home two years ago and did a lot of improvements to the place and he feels this would detract from his property value to have a car dealership across the street. Mr. Hildesheim of 5239 O’Connell Drive indicated he is not in favor of approving the variances. He then said that he believes that they are being told this will be a low-key operation but he has Mounds View Planning Commission October 20, 2004 Regular Meeting Page 5 ________________________________________________________________________ seen it happen that they have to go from a low key to a high profile operation when sales do not meet expectations and he feels the property values would suffer with this type of development. He further commented that he feels the City should stick to its Code. Katie Murr of 5279 O’Connell Drive addressed the Commission and said she had three reasons that this should not be approved. She then said that the neighbors have a reasonable expectation of what will go in on a vacant lot based on the zoning and the rules for that zoning. She then said that they have only been at this location for six months but, before buying the home, they looked at the vacant lot, the zoning for it, and its size and determined that due to the small size of the lot the potential impact from a commercial development would not be too great. Allowing this would undermine the reasonable expectations of property owners in the neighborhood. Ms. Murr stated that the neighbors understand that the property can be developed and they are not before the Commission in an attempt to completely stop development but they would like to work with the City and developer to bring a development with a business that would be friendly to the neighborhood. She then said that this business is for credit union members and would not be beneficial to the residents of the neighborhood or of Mounds View as a whole. Ms. Murr commented that the developer has offered to put up a fence but it would be very difficult to buffer their view of this business because the property slopes down. She then said that, in terms of quality of the neighborhood, they already have to hound the car wash to stay within its parameters by calling in misuse and they do not need another business that they will have to hound to stick to the rules. Ms. Murr urged the Commission and the City to look for a better use of the land. Mr. Nordness indicated that the current zoning is B3 so there could be a fast food restaurant on the location without any variances that would be open until midnight. He then said that this proposal would be less of an impact. He further commented that the slope could be worked on and they are willing to put restrictions on operations to accommodate the neighbors. Mr. Nordness indicated the reason the building is closer to the street is to stay away from the neighbors and there would be only one access point so there would be no traffic on O’Cconnell. He then said that they would continue to refine the plan and clarified that anyone can buy a car from CU. Mr. Nordness indicated that this company is concerned about the neighbors and does everything first class. Brian Bennett of CU Companies addressed the Commission and provided an overview of his company and why they need to expand to accommodate car sales for members. Mr. Bennett indicated that this is a relatively stress free way for credit union members to shop for vehicles and there would typically be between 60 to 65 newer vehicles on the lot. He then Mounds View Planning Commission October 20, 2004 Regular Meeting Page 6 ________________________________________________________________________ assured the Commission and residents that there would be no advertising at the site other than stickers in the windows listing options and prices. Mr. Bennett indicated this facility would be for the acquisition and financing of pre-owned vehicles and there would be no parts or services or bodywork or any noises that would go with that and they do not intend to have a paging system. Mr. Bennett indicated this would be a professionally run facility and they are not looking to create angst with anyone in the neighborhood. Commissioner Meehlhause asked if there is an existing location where people could see the operation to validate the statements made. Mr. Bennett indicated that there is an existing facility in Brooklyn Center on Earle Brown Drive that has just 10 spaces where vehicles are housed. Mr. Frankki suggested that this developer look into the Hardee’s location for this type of facility. Mr. Nordness indicated that they looked at just about every available property in the area and the Hardee’s location will not work. He then said that they fully intend to work with residents to lessen any impact to them. Mr. Nordness said that he speaks for the representatives of CU Companies when they say that they intend to make this a showpiece and that they intend to make sure that the neighbors are taken care of. Chair Stevenson asked what happens if the sales do not progress as planned and the vehicles are left sitting because they are not promoted. He then asked how those vehicles would be promoted to move them. Mr. Bennett indicated that they have had over three years to learn the approach to this business and determine what to buy at what price point so they do not end up with vehicles sitting that they cannot move. He then said that this is not a start up business but an extension of an existing business so there should not be as much of an issue with having inventory sitting. Mr. Bennett invited residents to the new office campus in New Brighton to see that the facility is quality built and aesthetically pleasing and he assured the City and residents that this car lot would be nothing short of that. Mr. Bennett asked for the opportunity to work with residents to make this work in Mounds View and meet their concerns. He then said that this would only be done in a first class way or not at all. Commissioner Hegland asked what type of buffering they would be willing to do to meet the concerns brought forth. Mounds View Planning Commission October 20, 2004 Regular Meeting Page 7 ________________________________________________________________________ Mr. Nordness indicated they are looking at doing whatever it takes to make it right for the City and the neighbors. He then suggested building a mound to put the fence on to provide additional height and screening with the fence. Mr. Nordness indicated that there is a lot of light on O’Connell from across the street and they intend to have lower light levels than that. Mr. Nordness said it is important to him to work with clients who do what they say they will do and this company will do so. Aaron Backman, Mounds View Economic Development Coordinator, explained that the challenge with Hardee’s is there is split ownership with the building being owned by one party and the property by another and the two rarely agree. He then told the Commission and residents that this company is willing to invest $1.2 million into the community and toward the tax base. Dan Murr of 5279 O’Connell Drive pointed out that they were proposing making a mound or increasing a buffer along O’Connell but that is not possible with the plan as shown because it shows a drainage ditch for the parking lot. Chair Stevenson indicated this is just the first concept and there is time for further amendments to the plan should it move past this stage. Mr. Murr said he understood that but feels that his comment speaks directly to the lot size in that there is not enough room on the lot to do all that they are saying they will do with screening and accommodating runoff. Commissioner Scotch said that residents tell her that there are too many gas stations, too many pharmacies and then joke about adding car lots. She then said that she appreciates the hard work of Staff to bring development to the City but she does not feel that a car lot is the right answer for this location. Chair Stevenson commented that the Resolution is for denial and asked why Staff had not prepared a Resolution for approval. Planner Prososki indicated that, at the time she wrote the report, she could not come up with a hardship. She then said that, if the Commission feels the variance can be justified with hardship, Staff would need direction as to what the hardship would be so that a Resolution of approval could be drafted. Chair Stevenson indicated that he does not see that the hardship requirements have been met. Commissioner Miller indicated the Commission needs to uphold the law and, there are certain hardship criteria that need to be met and they are not with this request. Mounds View Planning Commission October 20, 2004 Regular Meeting Page 8 ________________________________________________________________________ Chair Stevenson indicated the developer mentioned the Hidden Hollow development he worked on but the variances required there were far different than this and he has no doubt that this would be a first class operation but this is not the right spot for this type of use. Commissioner Zwirn said he thought Ms. Murr’s points were eloquently stated and should hit home to the developer. He then said that, with the criteria before the Commission, he sees no way the City could make an allowance for this. Commissioner Miller thanked residents for coming and making comments. MOTION/SECOND: Zwirn/Scotch. To Approve Resolution 774-04, a Resolution Denying a Variance to Allow for a Reduced Front Setback for Parking Area and a Variance from the Minimum Lot Size Requirements for a Proposed Automobile Sales Lot at 2320 County Road 10 and 5260 O’Connell Drive. Ayes – 6 Nays – 0 Motion carried. Planner Prososki indicated that the applicant has the right to appeal to Council. Mr. Donely asked for clarification as to whether the Resolution of denial covered both variance requests. Planner Prososki indicated that the Resolution denies both variance requests. ______________________________________________________________________________ 8. Next Planning Commission Meeting: November 3, 2004 ______________________________________________________________________________ 9. Adjournment to Agenda Session There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the meeting at 7:56 p.m. (The meeting immediately adjourned to the Agenda Session) Respectfully submitted, Jim Ericson Community Development Director Transcribed by: Joan Lenzmeier TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.