Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-05-2003 PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting November 5, 2003 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., November 5, 2003. ______________________________________________________________________________ 2. Roll Call Members Present: Commissioners Stevenson, Johnson, Scotch, Hegland, Zwirn, Miller and Song. Members Absent: None. Also Present: Community Development Director Ericson ________________________________________________________________________ Index to Minutes Page Planning Case MA03-001 2 Proposed Longview Estates Preliminary Plat Applicant: Martin Harstad Planning Case VR03-010 7 Applicant: Velmeir Companies, Inc. Location: 2800 County Highway 10 _____________________________________________________________________________ 3. Approve Minutes a. October 1, 2003 MOTION/SECOND: Johnson/Zwirn. To Approve the Planning Commission Minutes for October 1, 2003 as Presented. Ayes – 7 Nays – 0 Motion carried. ______________________________________________________________________________ Mounds View Planning Commission November 5, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 2 ________________________________________________________________________ 4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda None. ______________________________________________________________________________ 5. Public Hearing and Discussion to Review the Proposed Longview Estates Preliminary Plat. Community Development Director Ericson indicated that this case is an application for a major subdivision of Longview estates that is a property consisting of a little more than 7 acres between Long View Drive and Silver Lake Road. He then provided a brief history of this property reviewing previous requests submitted on this property. Director Ericson indicated that this request is for 15 lots with 8 lots fronting Long View Drive and 7 lots fronting Silver Lake Road. Director Ericson indicated that this proposal has a maximum utilization of the land. He then indicated that the lots proposed meeting the minimum requirements not only for lot sizes, but for lots within a wetland zoning district. Director Ericson indicated that the plat was revised as there was one lot not meeting the requirements and they all now meet the requirements. Director Ericson indicated the issue with this property is the wetlands as approximately half of the property is wetland. He then pointed out on the subdivision map the wetlands and another drawing showing the mitigation area with the area shaded in pink designating the storm water drainage pond. Director Ericson indicated there are a number of issues that go beyond the platting of the property and those issues were addressed in 2001 and he has provided a copy of a neighborhood summary from the previous application raising those concerns. He then said the water table is of concern, as well as the natural water flow to the area, the trees, the nature of the soils, and whether the lots are suitable for construction. This is a very organic area with loamy soil and the developer will need to remove a substantial amount of soil to create a suitable building pad. Director Ericson indicated that the Commission is not able to approve or deny the request based on the issues with the wetlands but must look at the application and determine whether or not it meets City Code requirements. He then indicated that the City Council has to approve a wetland alteration permit and they will review and discuss the hydrology, the soils and the overriding principal of approval is whether this is the minimum alteration to accomplish what is proposed. Director Ericson indicated that Rice Creek has received copies of this proposal and noted the applicant will need Rice Creek approval as well as approval of the City Engineer and Public Works. Mounds View Planning Commission November 5, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 3 ________________________________________________________________________ Director Ericson indicated that the other issue relating to the subdivision is traffic and Ramsey County has a copy of the plat and is are concerned with the added driveways onto Silver Lake Road but they have no power to deny the request. He then suggested it may be possible to share driveways in some fashion to reduce the number of driveways coming out onto Silver Lake Road. Director Ericson indicated that the utilities would need to be brought across Silver Lake Road with either 7 cuts or running one main and branching services off of it. He then said that there are water issues on the east side of Silver Lake Road to deal with. Director Ericson indicated that two residents had provided the City with a letter concerning the subdivision and summarized the content of the letters by stating that both residents are opposed to the subdivision. Director Ericson indicated that the request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan but noted there is a policy that caution should be exercised when developing on environmentally sensitive lands. Director Ericson indicated that if the site is developed with the 15 lots all of the tree cover will be removed and a substantial amount of grading would be required to bring the building locations to the minimum recommended building elevation. Commissioner Miller asked at what point Rice Creek would be involved, before or after the Commission makes its recommendation. Director Ericson indicated that Rice Creek becomes involved when the application is submitted and that can be done before City approval or City approval would be contingent upon Rice Creek approval. He then indicated this matter would be back before the Planning Commission at its next meeting. Commissioner Zwirn asked whether there would be an elevation problem with Silver Lake Road because there is going to be a need to bring in additional soil and take out the loamy soil to make it buildable. Director Ericson indicated the drainage ditch would need to be maintained. He then said that he expects there would be driveways built up with culverts underneath. He further indicated that Staff would recommend that no fill be done within the right of way and that the existing right of way be maintained with the exception of the driveways. Chair Stevenson opened the public hearing at 7:20 p.m. Martin Harstad addressed the Commission and said he felt it would be appropriate to bring everyone up to date on the history of this property. Mounds View Planning Commission November 5, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 4 ________________________________________________________________________ Mr. Harstad indicated the property is 7.14 acres zoned R1 and if it did not have wetlands on it at all you he could have 26 lots on the property. He then said that two years ago he came to the City with a plat for 11 lots that met the standard for the minimum lot size but were short on the 125 feet of road width on some of the lots but, as a part of the project, there was a proposed wetland conservation easement to maintain the trees along Silver Lake Road. The Commission and Council denied that request and he is back with the 15 lot proposal that meets the requirements but sacrifices the trees. Mr. Harstad indicated that he would like to obtain approval subject to Rice Creek approval as it was done in reverse the last time and a lot of time and money was wasted when the City denied approval of the project. Mr. Harstad indicated that this plan means that most of the trees will be lost. He then said it is unfortunate but it is the desire of certain powers that he come in with a different plan that meets all the codes and he has done that. He further commented that he does not like this plan better than the one he proposed two years ago but, at the end of the day, both are salable and he asks for consideration and approval. Steve Kuhl of 5176 Longview Drive indicated that he is concerned with drainage after this property is developed because right now this property takes on water from the surrounding properties. He then said that building up the soil along Long View Drive with fill establishes a barrier to prevent the water from getting to the wetland. Mr. Kuhl commented that there are dips in Silver Lake Road in that area and they had to dig very deep and fill to get that road to the current condition. He then said that there is water that flows along the road and there will need to be culverts. He further commented that he feels the City needs to address the potential impact on the water table as well as the viability of putting driveways on Silver Lake Road. Dave Tillman of 5166 Long View Drive asked the Commission to keep in mind that although mitigation is allowed for what is filled 15 houses with two car driveways equates to 40,000 square feet of impervious surface once this is all completed. Dallas Thompson of 5178 Long View Drive invited the Commission to come by and look at the property. He then said that his concern is the water table issue because he has no water problems right now in his house but, if Mr. Harstad builds 15 dams in that area not to mention all the rest that goes with it, his question is who is going to be culpable to fix the water problems in his house that are caused by that. He further commented that he does not believe by looking at the property that Mr. Harstad can do what he is proposing to do without causing water issues for him. Chair Stevenson indicated the City is aware of the water table concerns and will consider them carefully. Mounds View Planning Commission November 5, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 5 ________________________________________________________________________ Lil Ward of 5177 Red Oak Drive indicated she is concerned about all the increase in traffic and asked if it would be possible to have an access to Silver Lake but to put all these cars back in that area where there are lots of kids concerns her with the extra traffic. She then said her other concern is with the loss of trees and habitat for the area wildlife. She also questioned why the area is no longer a conservation area. Ms. Ward indicated they were told this was a restricted wetland. Director Ericson indicated this wetland is not a DNR protected wetland but there are protections for it because it is a wetland. He then said that 20 or 30 years ago realtors may have provided information that the area would never be developed because it is a wetland, and that was true at the time due to the costs involved with developing in a wetland. He further commented that with lots becoming scarce, and property more valuable, it has become feasible to do what is required to develop the wetland. Commissioner Hegland asked what legal responsibilities the developer has as far as developing and causing water issues on an adjacent property. Director Ericson explained that the development agreement has certain protections built into it. He then said that, in this situation where there are known concerns with hydrology or water flow, there would be some requirement that if there were damages caused that could be attributable to the development the developer could be held responsible through a maintenance bond held by the City for a certain period of time to protect residents. Director Ericson indicated the City would try to do its best to protect residents if the City approves the development. He then said that the engineer and Rice Creek would review the property to make sure that there is no impact to neighboring residents. Mr. Harstad explained that he had been referring to the conservation easement he had offered with the development proposal two years ago that would have saved the trees. Sandra Kuhl of 5176 Long View Drive indicated that several years ago there was a proposal for a shopping center for this area and residents were able to curtail it with three words, health, safety, and welfare with the issue being the bumpiness of the road and increased traffic. She then said that another concern she has is the potential for the houses to settle because so much soil is brought in. She also asked what types of homes are to be constructed because the area may not be suitable for basements. Chair Stevenson indicated the proposal from two years ago was for homes that were in the $250,000 and up range. Mr. Harstad indicated the homes would still be in that range or even higher. He then said that the soil is all compacted after hauled in and it is suitable for constructing any type of home but the homes as laid out on the plat are split entry homes. He further commented that the houses Mounds View Planning Commission November 5, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 6 ________________________________________________________________________ laid out on the plans are an idea of what could be built there but is not a guarantee of what will be built. Chair Stevenson asked how many builders would own lots and be building houses in the development. Mr. Harstad indicated that his brother had expressed interest in building on these lots. He then said that if he were to sell to a different builder, then he would sell all of the lots to one builder. Director Ericson indicated that there have been several scenarios presented to the City and, if there is any indication from the Commission that it would prefer something else, it is possible to make that recommendation. Commissioner Miller indicated it looks like all of the homes are within the wetland or within the wetland buffer when reviewing Exhibit D. She then asked how there could be mitigation if it is all wetland. Director Ericson indicated the flood zone maps were created back in the 1970s based on aerial flights and are not true delineations of the wetlands. He then said that the information provided by the developer has been verified by Rice Creek as a valid delineation of the wetlands. Director Ericson pointed out that very little of the lot is located within a FEMA designated flood zone. He further commented that 95% of the property is outside of the flood zone as defined by FEMA and those homes would not be required to carry flood insurance. Commissioner Zwirn asked for copies of the study from Rice Creek from the previous application. Director Ericson indicated that he would provide them for the next meeting. Commissioner Johnson asked Staff to comment on the traffic count and what the road is designed to handle. Director Ericson indicated that Public Works and the City’s traffic engineer have indicated that the road is designed for houses on both sides of the road. He then said that road was built to handle residential traffic and only half the traffic that would ordinarily be there is there. He further commented that a 25% increase in traffic for that road does not represent a significant increase in terms of the management of the road and what it was designed to handle. Mr. Kuhl indicated that there is a pond and a creek bed flows through the area. Director Ericson agreed that those features are there but, according to FEMA, it is not considered to be a flood plain. Commissioner Hegland commented that it may be necessary to tear up the road to install utilities. Mounds View Planning Commission November 5, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 7 ________________________________________________________________________ Director Ericson indicated it would be a difficult area to install the utilities in but it is possible to do so. He then said that the utilities could come under the road in 7 locations or in one location and branch off from that point. He further commented that, if possible, the City likes to keep the utilities out of the ground water as they last longer. Director Ericson indicated this matter would be on the agenda on November 19, 2003 and told residents in attendance that they would not receive another notice for the Planning Commission but would receive notice for the Council Meeting. ____________________________________________________________________________ 6. Public Hearing and Consideration of Resolution 742-03, a Resolution Regarding a Variance for Reduced Front and Rear Yard Setbacks Associated with a Retail Commercial Development at 2800 County Highway 10. Community Development Director Ericson introduced City Administrator Ulrich to the Planning Commission as well as the new Planning Associate, Kristen Prososki. Community Development Director Ericson indicated that this matter was a request for a variance for parking area encroachment at the Amoco site. He then said that Staff is pleased to have a proposal for redevelopment on this site as it is a very prominent location within the City. Director Ericson indicated this is a variance request to encroach within five feet of the front property line to maximize the area for development, accommodate storm water management and to piece together the parcels to allow enough room for the project. He then thanked Mr. Backman for working so diligently on the project. Director Ericson reviewed the criteria for the variance with the Commission indicating that Staff feels this is the minimum requirement to alleviate the hardship. Commissioner Song indicated that this redevelopment is 32% shy of the minimum requirements of the PUD. Director Ericson indicated he had addressed in his report the fact that if this site were 5 acres and rezoned to PUD the City would have an opportunity to take a hard look at the requirements and make any necessary modifications to allow some flexibility to the parcel but, in this case, there is not enough land for the PUD. Director Ericson indicated there is sufficient greenspace due to the oversized right of way along Highway 10. He then said that Staff intends to bring the issue of setbacks along the Highway 10 corridor forward for consideration in the future. Mounds View Planning Commission November 5, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 8 ________________________________________________________________________ Commissioner Johnson indicated that if a PUD were possible on this site, the Commission would not be considering this request because a five-foot setback is justified and there are five foot setbacks in other locations in the City. Chair Stevenson opened the public hearing at 8:10 p.m. Tom Loucks indicated that his client is pleased to bring this business to the City of Mounds View and the intent is to build 30 stores over the next few years and the first one is in Mounds View. Mr. Loucks indicated that CVS Pharmacy is a large multinational company and has 4100 locations throughout the United States and is just moving into the Minnesota market. Commissioner Miller asked about the stores. Mr. Loucks indicated the stores are approximately 13,000 square feet and are very similar to a Walgreen’s. He then said that this proposal includes a 2500 square foot commercial retail outlet for some type of neighborhood restaurant or coffee shop. Commissioner Scotch asked whether there would be room on the site to locate a sidewalk facing Highway 10. Director Ericson indicated that the issue of the sidewalk would be addressed during the development review but it is the policy of the City to require trailways and, when there is not enough room to do so, the City has utilized the right of way for that. Commissioner Johnson commented that there is abnormally large right of way along Highway 10. Director Ericson indicated that the right of way is 225 feet all the way across. Chair Stevenson indicated that the one reason he is in favor of the five foot setback is because there is such a wide road easement. Commissioner Zwirn asked if the building proposed is a standard CVS style building. Mr. Loucks indicated it is a prototype building of 13,0000 square feet with a stucco looking exterior that is tan in color with very little signage and a rounded front main entrance. Commissioner Zwirn indicated it mentions that other options were explored but he does not feel that other formations for the building were considered to achieve the necessary parking. Mr. Loucks indicated the real problem with the lot is its lack of depth. He then said that CVS has certain criteria that they will not deviate from and that is the double loaded parking stalls, drive thru lane, and loading docks and this site lacks the depth. He further commented that Mounds View Planning Commission November 5, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 9 ________________________________________________________________________ deviating from the prototype layout creates all kinds of issues because everything is uniformly done and not custom for each building. Commissioner Miller asked where the headquarters of CVS is located. Mr. Loucks indicated that headquarters is out of Rhode Island. Commissioner Zwirn said he feels the developer has brought this issue on themselves by not being willing to change the design of the building to accommodate the lot. He then said that the statement that other options and configurations were contemplated is misleading because that is not evident to him. He further commented that corporate headquarters states that the building has to be this configuration. Commissioner Johnson indicated that the other options were land issues with garages being moved and giving up that back lot to retain the depth. He then said there is not enough option for parking. Commissioner Zwirn commented that, while other building configurations are possible, corporate headquarters is saying no. Commissioner Hegland indicated that other building configurations may be possible, but not for this company. Commissioner Zwirn said they bring a hardship on themselves. Commissioner Hegland commented that this company wants to develop this land and this is their requirement. Economic Development Coordinator Backman indicated that brining a redevelopment proposal to the City on this site has been a very lengthy up and down process dealing with a number of landowners. He then explained the position of CVS and indicated that, in order to make the development work, CVS has certain requirements that must be met so there are not other options for location of the building. _______ of Velmeir indicated that they have been reviewing this site and working on the proposal for 10 months. He then explained that any deviation from the standard layout reduces profits as the company has determined that it wants its customers to walk through the front door straight through the store to the back to the pharmacy in the hopes that they pick up other merchandise along the way. He further indicated that a lot of time and money has been spent on working out different configurations for the location on the site but the location of the drive thru and the front door cannot be changed. Commissioner Johnson indicated that CVS would not be here for the variance had all of the issues associated with the sale of the property been followed through with, especially moving the garages. He further commented that the hardship stems from working with all the different Mounds View Planning Commission November 5, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 10 ________________________________________________________________________ people involved and the extenuating circumstances surrounding redeveloping this property. He also commented that CVS has six months and a lot of money tied into this and he does not think they are getting any favors compared to others located along the highway. Chair Stevenson closed the public hearing at 8:33 p.m. MOTION/SECOND: Johnson/Scotch. To Approve Resolution 742-03, a Resolution Approving a Variance for a Retail Commercial Redevelopment at 2800 County Highway 10. Ayes – 6 Nays – 1(Zwirn) Motion carried. Director Ericson indicated the next step would be to provide the City with plans for the development review. ______________________________________________________________________________ 7. Next Planning Commission Meeting: November 19, 2003 ______________________________________________________________________________ 8. Adjournment to Agenda Session There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the meeting at 8:35 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.