HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-06-2002
PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Regular Meeting
March 6, 2002
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 6, 2002.
______________________________________________________________________________
2. Roll Call
Members Present: Commissioners Stevenson, Johnson, Zwirn, Miller, Hegland, Scotch, and
Song.
Members Excused: None.
Also Present: Community Development Director Ericson and Planner Atkinson
________________________________________________________________________
Index to Minutes Page
Planning Case No. DE02-001 2
Location: 4763 Mustang Circle
Applicant: Dave Fox
Planning Case No. MI02-002, ZC02-001 3
Location: 7653 Groveland Road
Applicant: Terry Martinson
______________________________________________________________________________
3. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda
There were no resident comments concerning items not on the agenda.
_______________________________________________________________________
4. Approval of Minutes
a. February 6, 2002
MOTION/SECOND: Miller/Johnson. To Approve the Minutes for February 6, 2002, as
Presented.
Ayes – 7 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
Mounds View Planning Commission March 6, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 2
________________________________________________________________________
5. Planning Case DE02-001
Planner Atkinson explained this case is a request by Dave Fox of FedTech for development
review of a proposed 12,000 square foot expansion. The original plan showed a 9,000 square
foot expansion but the plans have since been revised to show a 12,000 square foot expansion.
He then noted that the newly revised plans are not as complete as the set the City received
originally and said he expects to receive further information to be provided to Council.
Planner Atkinson reviewed the dimensional requirements for the expansion and indicated that all
setbacks would be met with the expansion. He then noted that the parking area would not be
changed, meets the setbacks, and has the required number of parking spaces. He further
indicated that the applicant has not proposed any additional access points for the facility.
Planner Atkinson indicated the Public Works Director had reviewed the plans for the expansion
and had no comments concerning drainage due to the relatively small size of the expansion and
the fact that there is an existing building. He then indicated that Staff is not requiring or
recommending any landscaping because the facility is not visible to any residents.
Planner Atkinson indicated Staff had included Resolution 693-02 recommending approval to the
City Council if the Planning Commission wished to act on it.
Commissioner Miller asked what type of facility FedTech is.
Dave Fox from FedTech explained the building is currently occupied by his company as well as
three other smaller tenants. He then noted the purpose of the company is light manufacturing
sort of like a machine shop.
Chair Stevenson asked what the percentage of increase is for the expansion.
Planner Atkinson indicated the building is currently 50,000 square feet and, with the expansion,
it would be 62,000 square feet.
Chair Stevenson indicated that the Code had recently been revised to require development
review for expansions of more than 10% and asked that the Resolution be changed to reflect the
new language in the Code.
Planner Atkinson explained that Council had not yet approved the proposed change to the Code
and that is why Staff had used the “old” language in the Resolution. He then noted that Council
would have the first reading of the proposed change at its next Council meeting.
MOTION/SECOND: Johnson/Zwirn. To Approve Resolution 693-02, a Resolution
Recommending Approval of a Development Review Request for FedTech at 473 Mustang
Circle.
Ayes – 7 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
______________________________________________________________________________
Mounds View Planning Commission March 6, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 3
________________________________________________________________________
6. Planning Case MI02-002, ZC02-001
Planner Atkinson explained this case is the consideration for approval of a minor subdivision and
a rezoning of the newly created lot. He then explained that the lot is a double frontage lot
fronting on Silver Lake Road and Groveland Road and Mr. Martinson wants to split it almost
exactly in half to create a lot fronting on Silver Lake Road.
Planner Atkinson indicated both lots would meet the minimum size requirements. He indicated
the applicant had asked that the newly created lot be rezoned to R-2 so that he would be allowed
to build a twin home on the lot. He then indicated the rezoning would not be consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan because the Plan calls for low density residential in that area. He noted,
however, that Staff did not feel a twin home would be detrimental to the neighborhood because
there are some twin homes to the north and some to the south. He further indicated that Silver
Lake Road is a heavily traveled street and Staff feels that adding the twin home would not be
inappropriate.
Planner Atkinson indicated that residents had been notified of the rezoning request and one
resident is in attendance to speak to the matter. He further explained that the resident in
attendance lives next door to the proposed new lot and he is very concerned about the drainage in
the area because in the spring with snow melt, and during the summer with a heavy rain, his
backyard floods. Planner Atkinson then indicated that he had spoken to the City Engineer and
public works Staff and both are aware that significant improvement would need to be made to
the drainage in the area in order to be able to build on the lot without negatively impacting the
adjoining properties.
Planner Atkinson noted a park dedication fee of $2,110.00 would be due to the City before the
document is recorded with the County, if approved by Council. He then noted Staff had
provided two Resolutions, Resolution 691-02 recommending approval of the minor subdivision
and 692-02 recommending approval of the rezoning request
Commissioner Miller indicated a single family home could have significant impact on the
adjoining properties just as a twin home would.
Planner Atkinson indicated that any building application would need to be reviewed by public
works to make sure the drainage is adequate.
Chair Stevenson asked whether the property was located in the wetland buffer zone or the
wetland area.
Community Development Director Ericson consulted a map and indicated the wetland buffer
does not extend to the property.
Chair Stevenson asked the width of the property.
Planner Atkinson indicated the width of the property is 132 feet.
Commissioner Johnson commented he would like to know how the City comes up with the land
value assessments because he feels they are too low.
Mounds View Planning Commission March 6, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 4
________________________________________________________________________
Director Ericson explained the City bases its numbers on the assessed valuations provided by the
County. He then explained the City could use an appraiser to determine the value if the City
feels the valuation presented by Ramsey County is grossly undervalued but noted that appraisals
typically cost $350.00.
Commissioner Zwirn asked if the applicant is aware of the work that will be needed and the
considerations that would apply to the neighbors with regard to water flow in the area.
Planner Atkinson indicated the applicant is out of town and not able to attend this meeting. He
then noted that the applicant was told that, due to the drainage issues in the area, steps will need
to be taken to ensure the drainage is adequate. He further noted Staff had a pre-application
meeting with the applicant and explained what would need to be done in order to be able to build
on the property.
Commissioner Hegland asked if Staff was aware of what type of building the applicant intended
to construct on the property.
Planner Atkinson indicated the applicant intends to construct a twin home on the property but
Staff has no information as to the type of building.
Commissioner Hegland expressed concern for the type of building to be constructed because
there is a wide variation in the quality of twin homes.
Planner Atkinson explained that the applicant intends to sell the property after the subdivision
and rezoning. He then noted Staff was told by the potential buyer that drawings could be
provided to the City.
Commissioner Johnson indicated his main concern is that the buyer knows what has to be done
with regard to drainage to make sure the City does not end up in a position of approving
something and having the developer coming back for further approvals after the fact. He then
said he would be more comfortable if the buyer of the property was at the meeting so that the
Commission could make sure he knows what will need to be done.
Commissioner Miller suggested approval of the subdivision and tabling of the rezoning request
for further information.
Planner Atkinson indicated that a single family home would have the same drainage issues.
Commissioner Scotch indicated she would prefer to table approval of both requests because she
is very concerned about the water issues in the area.
Frank Herrick of 7680 Silver Lake Road addressed the Commission and indicated he has lived
there for 6 ½ years and twice has had water one step out of his back door. He then commented
that there are issues with regard to twin homes that he would prefer not to deal with such as
rental units that no one takes care of, vehicles that do not run, and a lot of extra noise because
there are more people than there would be in a single family unit.
Mounds View Planning Commission March 6, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 5
________________________________________________________________________
Mr. Herrick expressed concern for allowing a twin home unit with the potential of more kids
than a single-family unit because of the water in the backyard. He then indicated the water is
quite deep and neighborhood children bring boats and all kinds of things to play in the water.
Mr. Herrick asked the Commission to uphold the Comprehensive Plan and leave the property
zoned R-1 because he would prefer to have a single family home next to him rather than rental
units. He further commented he had moved to Mounds View for the big back yard and peace
and quiet. He also said he is not trying to deny his neighbor the right to develop the property but
said Mr. Martinson knew, when he purchased the property, it was zoned R-1 and it should be
kept that way.
Commissioner Scotch indicated it is possible that the twin homes could be owned units rather
than rental units and noted the twin homes to the south are nice. She then said her main concern
is the drainage in the area.
Mr. Herrick indicated he was told by the City to pump the water into the street and that ended up
washing out his neighbor’s driveway.
Commissioner Johnson commented that the value of R-1 is just as good as the value of R-2 and
said the main concern for him is the drainage issue.
Commissioner Hegland said he would disagree with the zoning until he is shown what the
applicant intends to build on the site. He then said he could see approving the rezoning for the
right type of building. He further commented that the drainage will need to be addressed
regardless of what is built on the site.
Planner Atkinson indicated the City could require house plans in conjunction with the rezoning
request.
Commissioner Scotch indicated the lot looks low and asked if fill would need to be hauled in.
Planner Atkinson indicated he was not sure but said the engineer is aware of the issues with
drainage in the area and has said it is possible to put a house on the lot.
Commissioner Song asked if the potential buyer is willing to provide blueprints for the City to
review.
Planner Atkinson indicated the potential buyer has said he is willing to provide house plans for
review.
Commissioner Hegland indicated he was fine with the subdivision but would prefer to table the
rezoning request for further information.
Chair Stevenson requested that the Commission indicate when the matter would be heard again
when tabling because he wants to make sure it does not appear that the request is being put off
indefinitely.
Commissioner Zwirn indicated he would prefer to table both requests for further information.
Mounds View Planning Commission March 6, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 6
________________________________________________________________________
Commissioner Hegland asked if there was any reason why the City would not allow the
subdivision.
Commissioner Johnson indicated there was no reason to deny the subdivision of the lot but said
the Commission can vote not to approve the rezoning request because it is not consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan.
Chair Stevenson said he did not see a reason for holding off on the subdivision request.
Commissioner Miller noted that, if the document were not recorded within a certain amount of
time, it would be null and void so if the applicant decides not to do anything with the property it
would revert back.
Commissioner Johnson said he felt the applicant would sell the property for single family
development if the rezone is not approved.
MOTION/SECOND: Stevenson/Hegland. To Approve Resolution 691-02, a Resolution
Recommending Approval of a Minor Subdivision of 7653 Groveland Road.
Ayes – 7 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
Commissioner Johnson said he would like to table the rezoning request for further information
from the applicant.
Chair Stevenson requested the tabling motion specify the reason for tabling and indicated that
reason was because the Commission wanted the applicant to attend the meeting and provide clear
information as to the type of building to be built on the lot.
Community Development Director Ericson indicated the zoning is R-1 unless the applicant can
provide a compelling reason to change the zoning to R-2. He then suggested tabling the matter
and allowing Staff to communicate to the applicant that the Commission would like to have the
applicant at the meeting prepared to provide information as to the type of building to be
constructed on the lot and answer questions as to why the rezoning should be granted.
Commissioner Miller indicated she wanted to make sure the potential buyer is aware of all the
requirements concerning the water issue.
Chair Stevenson indicated the Commission did not want to see this matter again until the plans
are finalized and ready to be presented to the Commission.
MOTION/SECOND: Hegland/Miller. To Table Consideration of the Rezoning Request for the
Rear Portion of 7653 Groveland Road From R-1 to R-2 Until Such Time as the Applicant Can
Attend the Meeting and Present Building Plans to the Commission for Consideration.
Ayes – 7 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
Mounds View Planning Commission March 6, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 7
________________________________________________________________________
Commissioner Scotch asked whether the drainage issues are a City issue or a private issue.
Director Ericson indicated that the drainage issues are a private matter but said the City can work
with the applicant and/or potential buyer to ensure that this development does not add to the
current drainage problem in the area. He then said he feels the drainage issues can be overcome
on this lot with attention to detail to make this subdivision possible.
______________________________________________________________________________
7. Next Planning Commission Meeting: March 20, 2002
______________________________________________________________________________
8. Adjournment to Agenda Session
There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the
meeting at 7:48 p.m.
(The meeting immediately adjourned to the Agenda Session)
Respectfully submitted,
James Ericson
Community Development Director
Transcribed by:
Joan Lenzmeier
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.