Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977-07-20 PC Minutes, ' MEETI~G Or THE PLANNING CO~yISSSON CSTY OF' MOUNDS VIEW ~ RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA i . ~Phe moeting of the Mounds VSew Planninq Commiasion was called to order at 7:AU PM, Wednesday, July 20, 1977, et the Moun3s View City Hall, 2401 Hlghway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112. 1Nembara prasent: Chairperaon Haake Commiesion Member Blanchard Cummieaion Member Zeppar Comtniesion Member Foss . Cammission Member Mackeben Commission Member Fedor Commiaeion Member Glazer Ccuncil Memhar Haumgartner Commiaei.on Membar Burmeietor Nuilding & 2oning OfFicial Roae Corr.e~L-iona o£• tha June 8~ 1977, minutes werA submitted by Chairperson Haake: 2nd page, lst paragraph, lat line, llth word changed f.rnm ° "would" to "Rhould"s 3rd page, last paraqraph, 6th 11ne should read "R-1 to R-4 would be permanent"; paqe 9, let paragraph, 2nd line ' parking spacer~ should be "9y x 20" not"9y x 28"r Paye 4, 2nd p~ragraph, llth ltne ahould read "brinq tha property back" not "being the property back"i page 8, last paragraph, 9th line ahould read "91"' not "90"'. MSP (SUiTneister-HaaY.a) to approve the June 8, i977, minutes ae corrected, 9 ayes ,~1 ! ITEM3 FOR C9NSIDERATION: MINOR SUBDIVISION AND VARIANCE_OF PROPERTY AT 7959 6UNNYSIDE ROAD OfPicial Rase explained that Mz. Weller, owner of ptoperty located at 79~9 Sunnyside Road, wished to aubdivide his 165' lot into two lota, the south lot with the exiating houae to be 89' x 231' and khe new lot to be 76' s 231'. Both lota would front Sunnyaide and services aze availab).e for th4 new lot. Code require:~ that 165' lots be subdivided equally but due ko the existing hnuse this becomes impossibla. The existing garaqe woUld have a 5' setback from the new .lc~t. A garage on the north side of the 76~ newly created lot is also 5' from the common pr~perty line. OfficiaJ. Rose furth~r escplained thut Nr. Waller also requests a vart.snce of 1' fr~r bui2dfng setbacks as the new home he plans to build will be 62' long. Code ;aould require a 77' lot to accommodaY.e a house of that size. Chairperaon Haako asked Mr. Saeller if he had anything h+a wished to add. Mr. Weller then proceeded to show the Commissioner the home he was qolnq to build noting that it would be difficult for him to reduce the size nf his house oY qarage one foot. He stated he was planc!lnq to put two garage doora in his garage, one in front and onQ ir. back so that he would have accesa to hie back yard. He stated his neighbors cou13 also use it iP needed. !~ lhairperson Haake asked if Mr. We1Ler planned to reaide on the new lot ~~~and he stated yes. -Z- MSP (Fedor-Zet~per) to recommend to tha City Council that they approve ~ne minor subdivieion aP Joseph Weller, 7959 9unnyeide Road~ areating two lots, with the north lot to be 76' x 231' and the sauth lot 89' x 231', and also to grant him a variance of 1' on the side yard eetback requiremente on the qarage aide oE the northern lnt For tho conetruction of a new home. This variance ie qranted due to tho Eaat L•het the lot has only a 76' frantago. B ayea MINOR 8ll8DIVISION OF P1tOPERTY LOCATED AT 8408 LONG L.AKE RORD Commi;~ion Memk~er Foss askad to be excused since he had a conElict of intereat in the matter. Ofi`icial Ruse expl.ained tha.t thio again was a m.i.nor aubdivieion ae the last item, except ehat thia lot £ronts on two atreeta, I,ong Lake Road and Greenwood Drive. The lot ie 100' wida and 272.82' long on the north and 344.27' on the south, mhe irregularity is due to the curve of Lonq Lake Aoad. The gpplicant; has reqaeratad to subdivide the parcel into one lot front•ing Greenwood Drive 100' wide x 170' deep an3 one lot fronting Long Lake Road 1Q0' widP x 102.82' c3eep on Lhe north and 174.27' daep on the south. The lot fronti.ng Grr~enwood hao services provided while tt~e Zot Pronting Long Lake Aoad will require an extension of water maln aervicea which would pe required o£ the b~ilder. Drainage requirementa along Long Lake Road would be met to County specifications. Rear lot line does not correspcnd to previoua subdi- - visinns due to curve o£ Lonq Lake Road. City does not foreaee additional drainage easPments needed in the area. ~~ Chairperson Haake asked if the applicant had anything to add. George Payno cpoke for the applican: and explained they requested tha affsat of rear lot li»os to mnke both lots more deeirable for building. b19P (Mackoben-Hurmeiater) to racommend approval of the minor aubdivision oY Ben Peichel, 8408 Long Lake Road, the property being 100' wide on west side, 2'/2.82' deep on north s!de, 344.27' deep on tho south side, with frontage af .t22' on east side, into two lotsi with the lot Eranting Greenwood to We 100' wide by 170' deep an3 lot front Long Lake Road to be 100' wide at rear of lot, 102.82' deep on the north and 174.27' on the south, with ],22' frnntaye. 7 ayes 1 abstain Commisszon Member Foss rejoined the meeting at this time, and Commiseion Diember Zepper asked to be excused due to a conflict of intereat on the next Sssue. PR~LIMTNARY PLAT FOR PROPERTY AT Z500 HIGHWAY 10 Pteve Roae gave a background of the property in queation. The zoning map denotee the south area ae R-2, while the north area ia donated ~s-2. The land uee map den~tes the areu as medium dens'ity, with a { ;aximum of six unite per building. O~/ The property lies in District 1, whir.h recommende for that area that "qeaeral use patterns, commercial and high densfty resi3enL•_:.1 development -3- ehauld be loaatod in proximity to Highway 10, with a decreaea in ~nteneity o£ use occurring outward fro,n tho higha~ey toward tha low eneity residential nQiqhhorhoode to the aouth a~id weRt". The total land area is 23.8 aaree. The purpose oE the e-2, Limited Bueinesa Dietrict, is to provide £or low intensity, retiail or serviae outlete which deal directly with tha austomsr £os whom the goods or sarvi~os are furn~ahed. The usea allowed tn the 8istriet are to provida hoods end servicee on a limited community market acale and located in greas which are well aerved by collector or arterial street facilitiae at the edge of reeidontial distriote. The de£initior, of Limitod eveinees usee would ~ilow for a bu~farinq of Ni~hway 10 to the Madium Deneity. Development Madium ~ensity fror~tinq or rearing on f[yg~way 10 would ee~m not to be advantayer,us or economical. A higher denu±ty residenticl or co:nmerr,ial would be more economical, The devalopment 2s eketched preeerves a majority of the nai•ural amenities aa the Comprohensive Qlan advisos. The ponding area wil.l be utiljzed as ~pen space and orovide a holding area for naturul runoff. The street plan and acceas to khe property poaes no problem and can be coordinated with the street plan of tlie property to khe west. The Staff recommended thak the Plan, as outlined, ie more desirable than preeent zoning, yet does not meet Land Uae Map classification. I~ -~.oea meet the criteria for District 1 uaes. The type of 1lmited business sea could be the key for a desitable and economical developmer.t. The applicant hao submittgd a preliminary plat with aropnsed zonings and a preliminary grading plan for which they seek an approval. Tha plat ia compoaed of Additione 1 and 2, with the lst Aadition creating 11 lote, which all front County Road H-2. The weat 10 lol•e are propoeed to be deveioped R-2 (duplex). Lot 1 is ~ corner lot 110' x 130' with all the other 9 lots being interior 100' x 130', All R-2 lota meet area and frontage requirements (12,500 square feet and 100 foot fxontage). Lot 11 is proposed ho be developed 8-2 (parking lot for ponatelle's). The lot. i:; five sided and fronts both County Roads H-2 and Highway 10. The exiating B-3 uae to the cast of the lot ia in need oE additional parking to meet Mounds View's parking code reyuirements. Thi~ lot should eithar be developed ta meet h.hat need or ba daveloped R-2 along County Road H-2. Tho Staff recommended proposed zoning be changed from B-2 to B-1 ae a parking lot is a perm~.tted acceasory uee in a ~-1 claesiflcation. The Second Addition creates 3 blocko and 18 lots. Block 1 would be 14 lote, of wh~ch Lota 2-11 would be developed R-2, Lot 1 developed H-2 and Lots 1?., 13 and 14 developed B-1. Block 2 would be three lots, with all of them befng develuped B-2. Block 3 would be one lot, tu be ""'',eveloped B-2. All lnta with the exception of Lok 4, Block 1, 2nd Addi- ~..r~ _q_ tion meet Erontage and area requirements. Lot 4 hae required square ~ootage but has a subetandard bu.tldable frotttaye. Code requires 100' md only an averaga of 97' ie provided. Although the lot Ss subetandard it preeente no buildable probxem wlth a 95'-100' tronCage. A holding pond would be neceseary for the development and io required by City, Coanty and the Rice Creek S4aterahed. All roade and cu~-de-esc right-of-waya maet Mounds View code spocificationa. Also, the drainaqe and ponding area are adaquata as provided, Additional 10' (total 20') easemente are neceesary alona the following lot l~nea Eor the looping of water servicea: Lote 4 and 5, ~lock 1, ls~ Addition and Lote 7 and 8, Block 1, 2nd Add~tion. 1'he StafP now.recommends approval to the Council of the pr.aliminary plat, prelim3nary qrauin~ plan and rezoning with the followiny cunaidora- tions, that an additional easement ba takan for 7.oopinq oP water aervlcee, that the ponding area be privately owned and maintained, and a varianoe granted for Lot 4, Block 1, 2nd Additior, for substandar8 frontage (97'). Mr. Oleon, an engineer representing Mr. O'Neil, siated that 'c.hrr plan was presented ln the skatch plan staqe and that khey were now before the Planning Commiseion foi rezoning and pxeliminary plat approval. Commiasion Member G1a2er asked iP all the R-2 units would be rental unlts. Mr. Olson raplied that hopefully there would be an owner in one halE, with a rente.r in the other. ommission Member Glnzer stated that he was concerned with the depth ~~~f the pand and felt ti:at the deptYa would not minimize the algaa. Mr. OYson replied that it wae f.ound that algee grew much better in deptha of ~ive feet or lees. Commisaion Member Eurmeister asked if the lot proposed for ponatelle's would be includad in tha drainage plan. Mr, Ulson replied that there wna an exieting sewer system there already. Allen Zepper, apeak3ng as a citizen and not a Ccauni~sion Memmer, asked whera the water ~ould ga from Ridgo Road and Long Lake Road. Counail Member Aaumqartner replied that it goes east to IsondalA then eouth to Woodcreot ihen easl to Bona Road anci then aouth again to Rico Creek. Mr. Zepper questioned the amount of fill that would be re~uired in the area. Mr. Olaon replied that the qrade is beiow water level and that a grading permft hae been requested from the City. The area would be filled in considerably. Mr. OlAOn also etatad that one of the reasons the project had be~n expedited was because the owner had acceRe to Eill for the'axea. Also, all tcees would be saved wherever poseible. Commisaion Member Glazer pointed out that the depth of the holding pond would actually help the miaquito pro6lem as misquito's prefer ahallower areas. a ~~ -5- Mr. 2eppar pointed ou~ that the Ciky is trying to keep commes•cial ~ehiclee out oE the residential areae and e*,ated tha~ paople would ~ve to drive through the aommercial area to reaeh their homes. Also, 'the area is not made ior heevy traffic Elow that ia anticipated. Mr. Olson stated that the original propoeal had planned for a aeparation betwaen the commercial and xesidenti~3 areas hut that the Planning Commission had wanted more residential aroa. Aleo, the traffic f].ow was checked from Long Lake Road and Eound to be acceptable and that a signal would probably be put in once the traffic reached a certain point. Dennie Olaniok, 7918 Groveland, asked Mr. Olson what price range the duplexea would be in. Mr. Olaon replied that thoy would be similar to the duplexes presently located on Silver Lake Rond and Miseiesippi. PaulinP Steller, 2454 County Road H-2, etated that she had talked to Ramaey County regardinq the trafEic flow and that shA helieued the increaeed traffic would be a hazard ta children in the neiqhborh~od. Mr. 2eppor asked if the Planning Commission was nware oS ehe tra£iic already on the road. Com~iasion Member. Foss replied that moat of the traffic on tt-2, other than the apartments, was basically from people going to work at Medtronics, Onan, marget and ao torth, and that the pxoposed duplexes would not increase the traffic a great deal. ~r., Zepper stated that he did not want to sae any commercial huilflings =-~oing directly out to Long Lake Rnad, Chairperson Haake pointed out hat all the planned building fox Lonq LaY,e Road would be R-2, '~--v~hich would have a low traffic Elow and the commarcial buildinge would be exitina onta Highway 10. Councilm~mber Batungartner pointed nut that the wooded area is quite heavily in~ectad with oak wi].t and that many of the trees wiA1 bs loat within the next year or so. Cqmmission Member Foss pointed out thah. in Mounds View the majority of the developmant has besn in single family homes aud that taxes have gone up considerably and that the citizens should be planning ahead and allowing commercial development to help relieve the tax situation. Commiesion Member F'e3or asked if the holding ponfl would ba used ae a park at nome time. Chairperson Haake eaid it w~uld not. Ghe also pointed ouL that medium deneity allows up to six units per lot and that the developer is on2y aeking Por two. ~ MSP (Haake-Blanchard) to recommend to the Council that they approve ~ thQ praliminary plat for the 0'Neil ~ddition, dated 6/23/77, as presented to the Planciinq Commission. Also, the plat requires a variance oE 5' for the f.rontage of Lot 4, Block l, Second Addition. It will also require an addittonal 10' 'utility easement on Lots 7 aud 8, Hlock 1, Second A3dition, and a 10' easement on Lots 4 and 5, Aioek 1~FiYat Addition, the common lot lines (total 20'). The plat will requira a rezoning .~f Lot 11, Block l, First Addn £rom R-2 to H-1. A downzoninq af Lots 17., 13 and.14, Block 1, Eecond Addn from H-2 to B-1 would be requirea, along with the downzoning of Lots 2-11, Hloak ~ Second Addn from 8-2 to R-2. The Planning Commission also recommenda that the hold~ng pond be raquired an~ thst it be maintainad by the owner ko meet the specifications _6~ of rhe City Enqineer, the riiae Creok Waterehed, or any ather related ~.t}apartment and that it not be ooneidered a park dedioation.~ f ~roll aall votg wae takene Commieeion Member Foxe - aye Commiaeion Member Dlanchard - aye Commiaeion Mentber Burmeieier - aye Chairperson Haeke - aye Commiaeion Member Glazer - nay C~mmiesion Membar F'edor - nay Commieeion btember Maokeben - nay 4 ayeA 3 naye Commiseion Member Mackeben atatad t.hat tha proposed piece of property to be aold to Donatelle'a wae not good plannin9, in hav:ng the R-1 bein3 scrose the atreet from tho propoeed H-2 zoning. Chairpr~raon Haake point-, :at thati the carner lot on County Road H-2 and Fdqewood had racently baen rezoned R-2. Comr,?iseion Mamber Mackaben dummarized and stated that his main objoction was with Lo't 11. Chairparson Haake etated that any development should have attention paid tn adequate bu~tering. Commission Member Burmeister etated that bhe Planning Commission should have it noted in tha minutes that adequate bufEering ehould be attained in any development, to i.nsure that the xor, next to Donatelle's is revfewed when Donatelle`s comes in. ~'ommiesion Member Glazer stated that while the plan Ss good overall,' .e dicl queation the ponding area and i.f the City should take it ae a park. He alaa staled that a holding pond would no~ respact the nature af. khe land. Mr. Zapper pointe8 ouY. that the kida in that naighborhood cannot reach a park without croaeing over Long Laka Road, County Road H-2 os Highway 10. Councilmember Baumgartner ste;:ed thafl there is a pask on Ridge Lane that will he givun to the City within the next few years. Chairperaon Haaka state3 that with the approval of the motion, it would then go UeEore tho Cauncil. Commiseion Member 2epper at thls time retcurned to his aeat on the Planning Commiaelo~~. MAJOA SUBDIVISION OB' PROPERTY AT 2172 MUSTANG DRIVE Mr. Aoae gave a baek.ground of tha subdi.;rision xequest. The app].icant, Bill Baim of FBK Investment Cc~mpany, has reguasted to create an addi- tional lat in a 32 acre parcal in tho Mounds View Industria2 Park far a:c industrial ware~houae iise, The lot would front and corner on the exteneion o£ Nlustsng Road and a new street propoeed to connect to a etreat in New Briqhton. The lot would be 200' fronting Muetang i:~:ad and 475' front3.nq the propoaed road. -~- Mr. Beim asked that i.t be pointed ~ut that there will be three lote ~ith the eubdivieion rath~r than the two ae shown on the Pianning ~ommiseian agenda. Chairperoon Haake asked thati it bo eo noted, that Mr. eeim wae propoeing tn subdivide one lot into three, rather than one lot .tnto two. OfPioial Roee corrected hie backqround oE the eubdivieion explaining thati the pla*_ areatad two additlonal lots beeide the ane cornerinq ~n Muatang and tihe new etreet. Hoth edditionel lote would have frontage on Mustanq Road and the endir~g 00' radiue cul-de-sac. Al1 throa lote exceed eize requirements for industxia7, lota. Con~ieeion Member Glazer asked what the purpose of the lot aplit was. Mr. geim raplie3 that he had received an oEf.er to buy Lot 2 and that lie plannad on developing one of the other lote, but had no plana yet for the third lnt. MSP (FOS~-Maakeben) to approve the major eubdivieion of PBx Investment Comp~ny, Eor tha property ].~cated at 2172 Muetang Road and to recommend to Cauneii that they approve th~ preliminary glat, dated 7/6/77, a~ submitted. 5 ayse Commiesion Membez Glazer aslcad that it be noted that the intent of the aubdiviaion was to aplit off a salaable portian of the land and that it would nut neceaearily induce dovelopment of Lot 2. --.CENE~RAL CONCEPT PLAN 3UHMISSTON OF PROPERTY I,OCATED AT 2245 HIGHWAY 10 __.Jfficial Rose reported that Mr. 8111 Beim hae requasted approval of the General Concept Pian for his mixed PUD. The proposed zoninge would be R-1, H-4 and I-1, whioh would include apartments, office/warehouse, oEfice, motei of£ice, retail commercial and reatauranta commercial.' The Comprehenalve Plan land use reconvnendation for tho subject acreage is com~ercial uees oriented to auto traffic. The present zoning ia composed of ~pprnximately ono half high deaeity reaidontial and one half geuarnl buainesa. Rezaning3 would be necessary in the final plan. Tha pr.oposed R-0 density factoz ie 15 unita per acra. 5cotland Green, a representative exant~le,has l7 unite per aare. Zoning allowa 17.42 anita per acre. The proposed zoning ie R-0 which allowa commercial u~es by condit.ional use only. Tha proposed B-4 deneity percentage ia 10.65 floor area per lot. Ueing McAOnalds and Mpunds View Squure as repzeaentative examples, thelr percentage of floor area per lot ia 7.528 and 23.668 r~apectively. The proposed I-1 denaity percentage is 26.17 floos area per lot. After a review of all uses and coneidecing f1UOr area to lot siza af axisting uaea and propoaed uaea, the Staff finds their overall denaity to be satisfactory. Mi~e Waod, a reprosentative for Mr. aeim etated that the area in •uestion has lostmoat of ite treea due to wind damage and disanao. ~lso, there aro two low areaa which could be potential ponding areaA. _g_ He rep~rtad tihat the propoaed zoning is a PUD proaose ar,d thati the ~tajor portian would be B-4. Also, iP all goea well with tho Sbate ~ Jlghway Dapertmar,t, a naw ncaosa will 6e gut in on Highway 10, thue ° providinq four eidad exposure to the davelopment. The road xliqnment of Woodale wae ohanged elightily on the concept plan due to lining it up with the proposed changeover. Okher than that, the concept remalne the eame ae beEore. Mr. Beim stated that he aould not quarantea that the area would look exactly as ~t wae laid out on the concept plan dua to the wishee and raquoats o£ whoever bought tha property and put in bueineseea, but that tha plan ehowed it to be how he doeired it be. 61r. tVoad po3ntad out there would be an office warehoueo or light indus- trial axea and that while an area had been aet asidefor it, 1t could not Ue guarantded that would be tihc~ exact apot it would be built. The bulk of the development will be retail, commercial and r99t3uran~. Chairperson Haake asked if the R-0 zoning would allow an apartment buildinq 10 etorieR hlgh to go in. Official Aoae replied thgt three stor!ea is the maximum and that the Gity did hav~ control over th9 height of any plannad building. Commiaeion Membar Glazer asked who.rA the figure 2.2 people per unit aama from. Mr. Wood replied that they had used the Metro Councll fiqures, which wne an overall aver.aqe taken throuqhout tite mntro area. :ltatrperson Ifaake pointad out there were presently £our lots exitiny onto .:ounty Apad H-2 and felt that there might be a problem with too much traffia trying to get onto A^2. Chairpereon Ytaako aeked whnE happened to the plan once it was approvad by the Commiesion and sent on to the Council. Mr. Roee replied that there ware three steps to go through,firet the conaept plan, then the development plan and then tlte final plan. The Council would oet a public Y~earing on th.°. is~ue. Chairpor9on Haaka stated that Mn/DOT ha3 reEused io put in a signallizd interchariqe until 1983 and aske~ if there was any chance of getting one earlier. Official Roae replied that when the developmen~ does taka p7.ace, a curb cut could be made to alluw a right turn lane, and thut the Stote Flighway Depnrtment works on a need basie, so he could not say whethez or not a eignal would be put in, Councilmember 9aumgartner stated that a meeting had been held June 20, 1977, wi.th a representative fro~r'the Highway Department and that the representative would not commit himaelf to the cut, eince t11e cub would serve na purpooe until the developmant was put in. OEEicial Aose also statad that tha Highway Department was oppoaing kJ~e signal becaase of prublema in synchroniLing the stop lighte. However, he dici not feel that the eignal was definiteZy ruled out. ~ -9- ~ ~ M3P (Heake-aurmeieter) to recammend to Council approval of the conaepr ,~"~lan Eor the Northcrest Park devaloYmant as pteeentad io the Planning ]ommtasian. The reasrvation the Planning Commiseion hae ie tha many --curb cute th~t are f~ropobefl on County Road F1-2 and that perhape ~hey could be minimized, it ie also tha Planning Commiseion's underatanding ttiat rhere will bo a full public hearing nn the conoeptual pian and that cons±derati.on will be given to the op4hions o£ the many residenta alung County Road H-2 during the Council's deliberations.l . A roll vall vote was tiakana Commiesion Member Foe~e - aye Commlasion Memhor Blanch~r.d - aye Commisaion Member Burmeieter - ayo Chaizparaon Haake - aye Commieaion Member Glazar - nay ' Camniesion Memher Fedor - nay Commisoton Membar Mackeben - aye Commission Member Eepper - eye 6 ayes 2 naye Commi.enion Member Glazer etated I~e £elt there were problems with tha in+tensity of the R-0 zoning f~r the area ao4th of County Road H-2~ and it wae far too intense to be immediately next to singl.e family areas. Commiseicn MemhPr aurmeister atated that she agreed with Commiasion Member Glazer concerning the problems of the intennltiy af ;~ie zoning. ^.haiLpert~on Haake staked that ahe also agreed with Commisaion Member ;lazer'e commente. ~ Ccemmioeion ldembor Lepper asked how anything could be approvad by the Planning Qommiaeion without knowing what was to l~e developed. Chair- peraon Haake replied that that ie what PUD ia, a plan without a dePinite d~'velopment set to takP place. Councilmember Baumyartner stated that you have to etart som~where and Ceammieeion Member Burme.iater etated that the idea is being approved eo that tdr. Beim could gu ahead and make definite plane for the developmEnt. Commission Member Fedor augaested that before going too ~~ar aheaC with the plana, thaE the R-~0 zoninq should be looked into. Coqncilmember Baumgaztner asked whet Commisaion Member Fedor Eelt it ahauld Ue if not R-0, and Commiaelon t•Sember Fedor replied it sliould ba, at the very moot, R-3. Commission MembPr Glazer stated r.hat the city would be in a much better position if chey added lowar denaity. Commisaion Member *'edor stated that if the area on H-2 dis3 end up to b:~ x-3,xoning the middle area industrial wuuld be a bad idea, Commiesion Member Burmoleter polnted auC tnat zoning the area R~-3 would involve more curb cute than R^D. ..rommisai.on Member Glazer otated tha~ he hacl H problem with R-0 in that. t wae £ar too intense for a aingle family neighborhood. Howovor, he ~ound the rest oE the plan acceptable. ~10- Ca:nmiseion Member Fedor otated he wo~~id like to make the City CounQil /"'~ware thaC with thie being the giret PUDr 8 lower zoning than R-0 would .eep the City in a bettor bargaining p~eition in the future, DBIVF-IN AN~ CUNVENIENCE FOOD PROPOSAL FOR 2741 HIGHNAY 10 FOR JAMES REFRIGERATIOK C,hairperson Haake informed Mr. James and his attorney, Stuart (3ale, thet the court reporter preeent with Mr. Gale would not be allowad ta take minutea of tlie diacusaion ae the City provided their own recording secretary. Mr. Gale replied that he wanted the court reporter to take minutce o.f the meeting ae he wanted an exact recar.d af wliat was said. Councilmember Baumgartner stated that the City At~ornay, 2iichard Ma~~era, lyad adviaed the City not to allow court raportars whan ther.e was a oity rr~cordiny secretary present. Chairperson Hzake told Mr, Gale h~ cou3d either dismias his court reporter or cancel the discuseian of the pr~posal. for Jamea Refrigeration. Mr. Gale requoated a recees to confar with his aliont,. A five minute recesa was granted. At the reawnption oP the me~etinq, Mr. Gale stated th~t he did not foel the ~i.ty recording secretary wae acceptahle but in the intareet of moving tha proposal along, ho wonld diamias hie court repor.ter and procead with ttie meeting. Offic±al Fose reported thgt the applicant, Charlee James uf James Refrigeration,proposea to develop a convenience food estabiishment .t the aorner of llighway 10 and Aed Oak Drive. mho Cumprehensive dlan Land Use Map denotes the land to be developed as hiyh denaity reaidontial. The,present zoning is Highway Buainess, 8-3. A 8-3 ! Conditianel ^ae Pexmit allowe a faat food or convanience fno~9 sa~abliehment. The bu1131ng would be 1900 square feet and would be approxltnately 40 x 46' Eronting Hi~hway 10. The building would be locnted 69' from the Red Oak right-o£-~~:ay and 59' from Highway 10 zight-of-way (a 30° minimu.T is requirad). The applicant has grovided 69 parking apaoee, while the code requ~rement is one spaca for every 15 squara feet less 10 percent. This would amount to 17.4 spaces. Aftor camparing parking at Perkins, McDOnaide, and Arbys, the 64 spaces appear to bo adequate. Howaver, a vartance or codo change would be needed. The daueloper has proposed a private service drive Eor the parcol oR lend. Accesa would be off of Red Oak Drive and Nighway 10. The aystem would aerve the proposea food estaqlishmant as well aa the exiating uae (Crown Auto) and an additional use not yet proposed. The curb cut proposed for Red Oak Drive is 26'. A varlance would be •required since 22' is maximum. However, the roqaeat tor the variance is reasonable and has been given in the paot. ^he proposal pr.ovides for n minimum 15' green area on both eide~ of the ,~ot fronting tha road. The code requirea 15'. -I1- Alonq the rear lot line bordering reeidential propeLtios the propoeal ~!~rovidea 9tl' wlth tk~e use of existing amenities to ocreen the R-1 ropertias (cnde rec~uiras minimum 20'). ~P1ie Btatf recommende that a minimum 6' fence also be provided along the zaar lot adjoining the R-1 propertiea. x 5' green area has been provided along tha eaet property line abutting an undevelopAd commorcial lot. The cocie requires a 5' minimurn. The Staff recommends thak if approved, variancee would be required for a rel_+,ef of 50 parking spauas and a relief of 4' far the ausb cut. C:~a1.r.peroon Naeke e+tal•ed that if the cnde req~i;~r~.5 only a?2' curb cut, she felt that 26' would be much bettar. ~anmiaei.on Member eurmeieter aeked how far the property line ie from tiillview 22o~d. Offiiual Aose replic:d that it is 11.65'. Commiasion tdember aur.meieter then atated that she was cor.cerned that stacking problems wou13 occur due to the heavy traffic at the Red Oak Drive and Highway 10 inCersa~tior,.. Cem~nission Membet Zepper. asked if there was any way for the proposed drive-in ta have the curb cut on Hillview rather than Red Oak Drive. Offiolal %ose reglied that there was a problem in coming out on Hillview as ln coming outt on Aed Oak Drive. The Staf~ check.ed the area and found that there was not much stacking on Red Oak Dzive. Chairperson -~Haake and Commiseion Members Blanclzard and Fedor stated. that they felt here definitel.y was a stacking problem thPre at timea, especially duxing ~che rush houre. Commiesi~n Member Zepper pointed out that Red Oak Drive ie propoeed to become an intersection batween the prop~eed new Highway 10 and Silver L~ke P.oad. The City haR expressed opposition to the concept but that does not mean that it will not happen. Mr, Charles James stated that he would like to explain his involvement witilxthe proposal. Ha stated that he had purchased the pro~eriy in 1970 and that• as a condition to his purcl~ase, he had to be guaranteed that the property was zoned s-3 and that a letter was provided him from the City of Mounds View, dated 7/13/70, from the City Admiaistrator, etating that the propc~rty wae'rezoned under orclinance 152 to 8-3. He, upon receipt r~f the letter, completed the purchase of the prop.::ty. Mr. James etated that he had developed Crown Auto next to the proposed lnaatton. 61r, Jamee atat;ad that rogarding the accoss ontta Red Oak Drive, he had euxvey'ed the property l~x correlation to t::o plat p].an and that the prosent traffic counts indicate there are nearly 30,900 care per day going through the intereeotion on H19hway 10, and that the figures shoul9 drop once new Highway 10 goea through. Also, the count taken on Silver Lake Road waa 3400 cars per day in the area of Miseiseippi Street, and that ae tha traftic progreeses nnrth, the count droYe oneidcrably, lu 975 st Red Uak Driva. Alao, he felt thet there ie a other point to make the exit other than Aed Oak Drive. However, he '"has allowed f.or stacking on the property itself. -12- Official Roee polnted out that the CiCy ie £acad wi,th that same prnblem ~~,imo and time agairi and that one of the. most .important thtngs to keep :n mind is that the C±ty muet have accege to allbuildinys for the fire " and police departments. Commieeion Member Burmeigter aeker] •ah~re th~: trafEla count came from. Mr. Jamea repliad that the figures came from Mn/DOT and that thoy were from 1974 and were the most recent figuras ava.ilable, and th~t Mn/DOT had kold him thooe Eigurea ohould be compounded 12 percent per year. Commission Member Burmelstar stated that ehe wae sure the fic~ures Mara ncaurr.t~ in 1979 b~~t thet a great d.ea1 0£ development had gone in the past thrae yeare and tha figures were very autdaced. Mr. James stated that once new Highway 10 ia bui.lt, Lhe truf£ic on o1d Highway 30 will decrease measurably. Commiasion Member Glzzer etated that this was not true, that Mn/DOT Y.ad told the City to not expect the traffic to dxop on Highw~y 10 once L•he new Highway 10 was puC through. Mr. Jamea introduced b1r. Paul riisso, who i.s thQ owner-operator oE the propose3 pra~erty. Mr. Riseo gave h1s backyround ot having worked for Howard Johnaon for 18 yearo, Allied Stvres for 8 yoare, Daytons for'8 yeara and that Is~ had just recently left Perkins to start h,is own buainess. He stated '~+:hat his rsalaurant was to be a family restaurant and would not be erving liquor, and that }is hae a brand new concept in reataurants -that he helieses w:.11 he aucccsssful. t4r. Risso staY.ed that he would like to clariPy hia propoegd rantaurant being called a drive-in and convenience fo~d establiahment. He axpla3ned that the definition oE convenienc:a food is anytlt±ng t:hat has been altared, and that all food mu~t be altered in some mannar when served in a restaurant. Ae for the driva-in, it ia actually to lbe a dxi~~a-throuqh, where cuatomers will pull up to an intercom and order their food and then drive through to a window where they will pick it up, nnd thon drive out wi.th it. He also stated that he wouid not be serving fast foods and that a7.1 foode would be prepared fresh on the premises daily, with the only exception being that he wauld be purchaeing Erozen fish ae Ereeh Eis11 wae tao expensive to fly in. mhe restaurant would,be designed to emit warmth and a family oriented ntmosphare. It would be immaculately kept up and an attendant will be seeigned +o patrol the parki.ng lot at lea.at onca every half hour. tio pick up any litter and to watch over it, and someone else wauld be a9eig~n.=d to tha same task inside. Mt. itieso etated !ze would~operate the restaurant and that hie son-in-law would be tha nighL manager. Their propoaed hours would be 11 AM to il PM, r perhape 12 PM en aeekenils. They would not ellow loitering at all~ .`~nd would cooper~te 100 percent with the police. _13_ t All equipment Eor the building would be anviranmentally eound. The ~'"`~etaurant would provide seating £or 75 to 80 patrons. ~ tn roference to the traffic, Mr. Riaeo stated that a etudy done by the National xestaurant Aeaociation ehnwe that the average car bringn ~ 3 people to a raetaurant and that he expects approximately 180 oare per day and that they will serve 400 people per day, including the 'i driva-throuqh aervice, thus resultiny in approximately 15 cere per ~ haur enterinq and extting the reataurant parking lot. Mr. Riseo intreduce~ Mr. Charlea Novak, architect of the building. Mr. N~vak atated thet there would be etacking provided for approximately two or three care before receivinq ordera. The plan ia for a 6avarian chalet typa exter.ior, to Le call.ed Burg~r Tower. The tower itself will have clocks on it. Tkie ronf iu to bo oE gabol. dasign and wi.ll allaw ail the heating aad air condit.ioning equipment to be put into it, thus sliminating it fr~m view from the outside of the buildinq. The interior will use a good deal of natural i.ic?~t. The concept calls for a nounter for self service and then seating. All areas of the building would be accesaible to thc+ handiuapped. Commiseion Member Fosa asked what peroentage o£ the people would Ue going through the drive-through as compared to boing seated. Mr. Risao replled that he oxpected 20 percent tq go thzouch the drive- hzough, with 80 percent coming inside for seating. ]#lso, with those ~--khat do go through the drive-through, it has been his e:cperienr.e that they then leave the premiaes and take the food elsewhere and d~ not park in 4;he lot and eat it there. Commieaion Member Eurmeister asked Mr. Risso if ha was affiliated wit}t another Eurger Tower. Mr. Rieao replied that he was not, that this would L•e ~he firsc Burger Tower. Mr. Gale atated thak. if it were to become a problem with drive-through customera reraaining on tha premisea to eat Lheir food, signa would be posted prohibitin4 conaumption ofi food in the parking lot. Chairpereon Haake stated that tite main problem was thr~ Red Oak Drivo exit and that problam altiould k~e Eocused ~~pon. CommiRSion Member Zepper asked what type of a menu would be offered so as not to make i+_ another McDanald's. Mr. Riesa said there woulci be Havarian chicken, roast beef, ham, hamburgera, German franks, french fries, nnion rings and home-made cookies on the menu. f~fficial Rose reported that the reason there may have been confusion about the type of reatauran~ it vrould be was that it had to be classlfied a conven3ence food eatablishment beaanea of the type of uteneil uaed i,;x se:rving the food, i.e., the ~omparison to MeDOnald's ~~ -14- Mr. Riseo stated that he has found kide eti11 wanti hamburgeru when ~hey go out to eat, He plano to have mueical chimea plnyinq in tihe ack9round ~f the restiaurant and ~b.st he ia trying to puE d~q~ity °w.back into the lower priced food. Commiasion ~fe,~nber Fedor aeked how Busger Towar would compare to Perkine. Mr. Rieao replied thnti otiler than tha size oP the menu, it would be very comparable. Chairpereon Haaka stated thati ehe wae ebill ooncerned about the trafPic cominq out nnto Red Oak Dr9,ve, Commie~ion Member 2epper etated that if the restauran+, did have 75 to 80 eeata, and the average car carried 3 peopla, that only 25 aare would be entoring per hour, which he di.d not £ee1 was exaeeeive. Chairpereon Haaka pointad out that the drive would eerve three eetablishmente. Mr. Aieso reported that studi.es had Ueen dane and revealad that the geagraphical market area of this type oE operation is no moxe thnn three milee. Also, there is a gocd pereentage of people who will etop at any i•ast food place to est, and with McDOnald'e in MounSs Viaw and Burges Kin9 by Northtown, there would not be that great a nwnber drivittg to his restaurant spec:lEically. ffiSSP (Glazar^Fedor) to racommend ta Counail that the request oE James !efrig~rRtian,to dewalop a conveniance Pood eetabliehment et the aorner --(NB) of Hlghway 10 and Rad pak Drive be denie8. The reason Por thl.e recommendation ie based on th~ pr.emisea thab it ie nat in conPormity with the Comprehanaiva Plan to preeerve the reaidential aharaoter ot thia particular dietrict. It is far too intenss to uae to abut an establiahed reeidential area. It aill promote s goad deal o! traPiia on Hillview which is presently quita aerenc~. It wl11 elso probnbly augment developmon~ along Red Oak Drive. The disausaion that bzouqht the upgrade of Compaseion Center currently applied to thie requeet.~ A roll aall vote was taken~ Conuniosion Member ~qrnmisaion Mernbe•r Cqmmission Member Chairperson Haake Co~mniasion Member Commieaiqn Member Commieeipn Member Cqmmieeion Member Fosa - nay alanohard - nay Burmeister - nay - nay Gl.azer - aye E'edor - aye Mnckaben - nsy 2eNper •- nay Commieaion Member 2epper ~ointed out thtst the nrea is already zoned 8-3. 6 neye 2 eyeo ^ommiseien Member Burmeiater etated that theze is elreedy high deneity 1~d commercial development in the area and that it Boee no*. qo againaC ~..~he Cemprerianeive Plan. It is epecially zoned Por 4uch e purpoee. -is- Commisaion Member Glazer replied thnt '~he particula= use ie bad for f'~he area. Cammiseion Member Aurmeieter replled that anythinq that ould qo in there then would be Uad. Commiesion Member Glazer etated that accese on and of.f oE Highway 10 from Re~ Oa1c Drive ie xlready difficult. He atated he lives on Hill.view and ie familiar with the traffic patterns and that it is - almoet impoaeible to get onto Highway 10 now unlese at a eignal. Chairpernon Haake pointed out that most peopie take Highway 10 either norCh or eouth to Red Oak Grive. Commieeion Member Fedor stated that ha would like to add a commant that many hours were spent working together on the Compreheneive Plan and that generally you do not qo against the Comprehansive Plnn. Commieaion Membar 7epper replled that the proposed restaurant would not go againet th~ Comprehensive Plsn an the area is already zonad B-3, which is what 1s requirad. Mr. Jamee etated that he bel+_eves the best uae of Lhe land is cor,unercial. Also, ho goinked out that when he was considE,~ing purchasing the proper.ty he wae told by the City that it was ~uitable for commprc3al uee and that ho did not believe it wae appropriate for aparhment buildinge. 8ordner Consultanta had repo:ted to him that it would bo eerved baeically by a ly mile radius, with a maximtun of 3 miles. ~~SF (2epger-Blanchard) to approve the conditional use and two vaziancas or the proposal Eor 9urger Tower as pr~eantad by Charles Jamea of -Jamb~ ~a£rigaratiou. Conditional use approval ~vill, r.equire a variance of 50 parking acaces and u curb cut of 26' ra~her than 22' on Red Oak Dr,~ A rqll aall vote was takens Commieeion Membar Commiseion Member Commlasion Member C,hairpaYSOn Haake Commieeion Member Comrniseion Membar Commiseion Meinber Cummi.aeion Membez Fose - aye Blanchard - aye Burmeister - aye - aye G1azoL - nay k'edqr ~ nay Mackeben - aye Zepper - aye Commieeion Member Fass pointed out that the zoning code akatoa that conditione must be met on conditional use ~ermits. The City Council must approve it and they can hold a public hearinq if they wieh. Commission Member Fedoz atated that varisnaee are generally granted for. hardships and that they ehould think abaut changing th~ ordinance a.s far as parking ia concerne8. The owner, Mr. James, has thrae lots with which to cnme up with tho required parkinq spacee. Chairpereon Haake aqreed thnt t}ie ordinance ehould be reviewed £or parking epacee. 6 ayee 2 naya -lb.~ Commieeion Member Burmoieter asked that tiie Council bo notified that /"`~;he Planning Commiseion wae concerned about the exit on Red Oak Drive nd have Ehe Council look at it and eae if t.hey can aome up with eome - Buggestione. MAJOR 5UBDIVISYUN dF pROPERTY AT 8270 GR~VELAND ROAD Official Rase reported that Mr. Stanley Fieher, owner of rhe property at 8270 Groveland Road, has requoated to aubdivide the lot fronting Groveland and Knollwood (460' wide x 458.2' deep) .into 10 lote of equal aize (92' wide x 211.6' deep). The lots meet size requirements. However, the exieting house floes not mPet setback requirementa as subdivision requeated (13' frotn r.eaz lot line of Lot 6). A varianca wuuld be required for a relief of 17'. The garaqe (22x23) must be relocated to meet setback requi,rements as it liee on the common lot line of Lote 6 and 7. mhe ehed on Lot 7 is ovorsized and ahould Ge removed or relocated. If it ia relocated, it must be reduced to ordinance size (2~8 =quare feet). Adjacent to the southern lols (5 and 6) is an undeveloped parcel 41.5' wide by 458.2' deep not owned Sy the applicant. Thia parcel ahould be incliade~ in the subdivision request, forming two corner lats and two interior lots. All luts in requested gubdivisio^ propose ho hava a 5' drainage easementi -- - aloag the rear lot linea. The lota faoing Groveland are low and therefore rill require fill, soil tests and grading pcios to bui131ng permits ~'.,,,~tieing issued. The 9taff recununenda that before approval ie glven, that thQ plut be revised to accommodate the future use oP the 41.5' strip of land located south ~f the presented plat. Mr. Robert Smith identified himself as attorney for Mr. Fieher and sta~ed that Mr. Fisher was not preaent due to his age and tho lateness of the ciiscuea, but that his son wae present. Mr. Smi.th stated that the parcel wa» pu.rchased by Mx. Fieher i.n 1991 and that aesessmenta to dat.e un tha property have amounted to $50,000. Mr. F.isher plans to keep his own home there. Also, the 2' setback would not demage the lots at all, and the developmcnt of the land would bc: beneficial to L•he CSty. MSP (Haake-FOSS) to reoonunercd to Coixncil upon re.ceipt of a new prelimi- nary plat drawn up on the Eisher Addition the approval of said new plan with the follo:uinq stipulationa, that there be nine deaignated lots, W1th ?,ots 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8 dnd 9 be1n9 90' Wide by 211.6' deep and that Lat 5 be 100' wide x 423.2' deep, and that the plat would deaignate a 15' easer,.ent off the baclc lot lines on Lots 1, 2, 3, 9, 6, 7, B and 9, for.drainage aae~ement, and Lut 5 wauld g1.ve a 28' ~,asement in the center part of the lot in continuatuion with the easement ylready on it, except it would be 2' lesa on the western most side ~ ~eeduae oE the pl.acement of the exietiny homestead. There ie also ""`an additional drainage easement of 10' that will be required on the north lot line oP Lot 3 eatending to the proposed new back lot line. The shed that will be located on new proposed Lot 6 will have to be re~n~vad. 7 aYes 1 abst. -i~- l Comrcieeion Membor Foss explained that he abetalned on the vote ae ~^'~e hed e confliot of interest. COMIdERCIAL VEHZCLE PARHIN(i ~ Counciimember eaumgartner reported thaC tho Councii wanta a recommendation from the Planning Commiesion if thsy wanti to make a zeoommendatinn on i the oPf-etraet paYking of aommerciul vehiciee~ and if eo, what aize, weigt~t, et~. Counoilmember eaumgartner etaEed thst he hed beeh driving i around Mounda View to qat an idea of the commercia]. vehialea involved , an~9 raoommended ~hat all Commiseion Membors do the eame. He etated that thare was a wide aseortment o£ vehicles in Mounda View to aonei.der. Chairperson Haake stakad that it wculd be hnrd to desiqnste vehielee , by weight or chassie. ' ' Commiesion MemUer 7epper stated it would be hard to claseify the ~ v~hicl~a by weight as some 1/2 ton trucke carried a heavior load and „ 1 we::e mose unai,yhtly bhan same trucke classiPied in the higher weight ` i categoriee. r; G i Commiasion Member Fedor stated that he was intereated in getting rid , oP the large seml!s. There was considerable diacuosion among the Commisaion Members as to, ; if commprcial vehicles ehould k~e conaidered with recreational vehiclee +~ nd whst stan3ards to use in evalixatinq the commarciaZ vahiclas, snd _...~Jhether commarcla.l vehiale owners would ba di~criminate~l againet ~ iE their vehiales were bannefl but rer.reational vehiclee weren'E. ~ ' Chairperaon Haake asked that the Commieaion Membera drive azound ~ Mounds View and that 0£fiaial xose put the topic of ofE-eCreet parkinq ~ of aommercial vehiclas on the agcnda for the next Plannin9 Commiseion ' , meetiny. ; ~ NIETROT.'OLITAN SY5TEM STRTEDSENT I ~ Of•ficial Roae stat.ed that ho would 11ke to recei.ve comments from the j Commi.asion Members o» the MetropoliY~n Syetem 6tatement. ~ ~ M~P (9urmeiater-Blanchard) to adjourn at 12=45 AM. ; Respectfully submitted, Pamela Young Recordinq Seoretary ti~