Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977-08-10 PC MinutesME@TING Op THE PLANNING COMMISSION ,r~ CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW r i RAMSEY COUNTY, h1INNE50TA The meeting of the Mounds View Planning Commission Was called to order et 7:30 PM on Wedne~~a:.y, August 10, 1977 aC. ~he Mounds W ew City Nali, 2401 Hlghway 30, Mounds View, Pilnnesota 55112. Members Present: . Chalrperson Haake Commission Member Burnieister Commissiun Member Mackenben Comnission Plember 8lanchard Comnission Member Fedor Cortmission Member Foss Corm~isston Member Glazer Council Member 9aumgartner Building & Zoning OPficial Rose Commissian Member Zepper was noted as absent without excuse, Correctinns of the July 20, 1977 minuLes were submitted by Chairperson Glaxer;,Page 4 second from the test paragraph, first sentence siiould read "COmnission Member Giazer stated that the city would be in a much better~ bargaining posi~tion if they mainCafned a lower density zone durtng the ~nterim." Page 14, the tast sentence of the motion should ~ead "The discussion and reasons for the sp11t vote on Compassion Centers request to expand its schoot certainly app7les tu muCh greater extent to th4s request:" r-~, Page 15, secand paragraph should read !'Commission Member Glazer stated that access mi '"' and oPf of Nighway i0 from Red Oak Drive is already difflcult. Therefore, Nillvizw ~' Road wouid nrabably be used as an alternate route." Cammiss4on Member Fflss asked that the motion on page 16 be corrected to read as seconded by Commission Member Burmeister rather than himseif. Comnission Member fedor entered the meeting ac 7:38 pM. MSP (Haak.e-Burmeister} ~o approve the Juty 20, 1977 minutes as cor~rected, 6 ayes VARIANCE kEOUEST OF ROB£RT i{ANSfN, 8415 KNOLLW000 DR7VE Official Rose repor~ted that Mr> Hansen has requested to build a G2' wide house and attached garage on a 75' wide lot. Mr. Hahsen has requested a 1' variance on both sides of the house. i'he !ot has substandard fron,tage 6ut is buildeble and has necessary services. On tf~e 7ot to the south, the linuse is 14' from the lot lin~ (10' is required), and on the 1ot to the north the house is 15' from tire iot'iirte (±0' is requtred). Officiat Rose recorrmendad that the house strucfiure be at the north end of the lot, allowing a 9' setback from the lot line. Tnera is an existtng 5' drainage easemenk along the north lot 11ne. If the garage is placed on th~ north side, the setback would have to be 5', as the easement is not ~uildabte. The house/garage p)ace could be on either s~lde as long as a minimal setback of 5' 1s obse'rved on the north side. ~ Official Rose recommended that the Gamnission approve t!!e variaace request as existinc~ structures on both sides, tog~ther k~ith the new structure, provide more thbn adequate setback. He no4ed that the lot has a substandard frontage end stated that the Comnlssion must stata hardship lnvotved 1f the varlance is granted. August Y0, 1977 Pape 2 ~~ Mr. Hansen stated that he would iike to build the garage on the south side of the 1ot as many tre~s would have to be taken down if it were to be placed on the north side. He aiso stated that he wouid be wi111ng Lo go alon~ with a 2' variance if the Commi- ssion felt 1t iaas nec2ssary. Commisston Memher Glazer asked Mr. Hansen how the neighbors felt about the vartance request. Mr. Hansen s4ated that he is the. u~ner of the home on th2 south sida and that tne neighhor on the norLh side did not have any ob~ections. Chairperson Haake asked the Commission what the hardship involved would be: Mr. Hansen rept;ed lhat if he had to scale the h~use down in order to buil~ it wtthout a varlance, it wou1~ throw the aPpearancP of the house off. It is to be Spanish styta with three arches, and he would have to cut out ttiao arches iP he was reyuired to scale it down. Chairpe'rson Haake asked if ati the luts in the area were 75'. Ufficial Rose replied that no, on~ was Y6.6', ane was 9A.0' and another was 75.0'. MSP (Foss-14ackeben) to grant the request of Robert Hansen at 8415 Knollwood Dr1ve ta build a 62' wide h~use with a 1' variance on both sides. The reason for the vartance is that it is a substandard tot and the house plan would probebly be more compatible with other houses 1n the area and therE is adequate setback of the hnuse on the north and south sides for fire protection, 7 ayes Commission Memher Burme9ster asked Mr. Hansen why, 1f he was tho ownNr of the 1ot on the south side, he didn't take the necessary land from that lot. Mr. Wansert repllud that he had ~ust sold the house and had sold it at its pwesent size. MINOR SUBDIVISdON REQUEST OF JAMES CELT, 7635 GRQVELAND ROAD Official Rose reported that Mr. Celt has requested to subdivide his lot equally, which fronts both Groveland Road and Silver Lake Road. The lot fironting GrovelanQ Road is to be 132' wide by z05' deep and the lot fronting S91ver Lake Road is to be 132' wide by 205' deep. The existing structures on the lo*. meet setback requirements, btith before and after the subdfvisfon and the ad~oining lot structures meet se.tback requirements. The existing overhead utility 11ne 1s located 149' from Groveland Road and wouid present no problem in the subdivislon. Water and sewer services are not avail~bte for the lot Fronting Silver Lake Road and Mr. Ce1*, must agree to pay construction costs f'or improv~nents before the City will approve his suGdivision ~~equest. Ufficial Rose stated thnt the utilities would run down the rear lot line, due to the fact that the road is u caunty road and due to the soil conditians on Silver Lake Road. Official Rose reported that utility easements for the rear 5' of boCh lots have been given and recomneoded an addttlonal 10' be given. 7ot~1 rear easements would then be 30' wide. Ne also recommended an addltional easement of Lhe east 12' be givon on the loC fronting Siiver Lake Road. ihese e~semen~s woutd ennble services to be pro- vided at ei4her the fronC or rear yard, depending on the feasibiiity and cost af each location. •_„i Offfcial Rose alsa pointed out that the tot split is equal and coincides with prev1ous subdivisions in the area. Atso, Silver lak2 Road ts 1ow and m~y require soil restora- *_ion, which would be raquired at the time the building permit is applied for. Officia7 August 10, 197T Rose recommended the Comnission upprove h1r. Celt's request sub~ect to his written ~ agreement to pay for necessary improvements for the development. Paye 3 Cumriission Member Glazer inquired why it was ner.essary for the City to tie up so much land for easements, i.e., A2' for this perticular subdivision, and asked if Qnco the utitity easements were taken, what would happen to the rest of the easemenLs Leken. Official Rose replled that the City could'vacate the easements, at the owners request. He aiso sCated that the 12' easement on Siiver Lake Road mlght possibty b~•necessary for a sidewalk. Counciimember Baum,yertner pointed out that the sewer and water 11nes would have to cross over two or three othar properties before reaching Mr. Ce1t's 1ots. L~fficial Rusu replied that ene~mente Nere takan on eurliar subdivision, but that additional footage wouid be necassery if services were run along the xenr lot Iinos, Offilcia7 Rosn also pointed out that the easements taken would not stop the owner from buildittg as curranC satbu~ks ara a minimum of 30 ft. Commission Member Pos, asked if a 30' easement was necessary for the ~ewer end waYer 11nes. Official Rose replied that it was. due to the soil conditions in the area, the land must be banked to insure that it does not cave in, Councilmember Baumgartner ;~sked if the development of the property would create dratnage problems since tha tot would have to be filled in somewhat and might create a dam. Mr. Ce1t replied Chat 1t would not cause problems since the north side of the lot was h7gh and then it graduaily sloped down to the south and that the onty area that would have to be fiiied in was the slope. Official Rose reported that the area was dry present1y although there was water further south from there a few years previous. Commission Member Glazer questloned if asking for a 42' easement was going to set a precedent for future develcpments in the area. Official Rose repiied that it mast 1lkeiy wauld but tha8 a11 the lots in the area were big and spaclous and wauld not crASta a problem. C~~mslssion t4ember Fedor asked Mr. Celt how he felt abcut a 42' easement being taken. Hr. Ceit raplied that the lots wero c~rtainly targe enough and that there were aatually two 1ots the eesements were being taken from, not ~ust ane, end that he didn't mti~d, MSP (Fedor-Gtazer) to recommend to the G1ty Council that they approve the minor sub- division request of John Celt at 7635 Groveland Road, creating two 1ots, both heing 132' wide by 205' deep, wlth !5' ut111ty easements on the rear 1ot 11nes on both lots and a 12' eas~ment on the east 1ot line. The petitioner would be required to enter into a written agreemerat wtxh tha City for all necessary improvements. 7 ayos Commission Member D)anchard asked what would haopen if e property cwner refused to grant the necessary eesement. Officiet Rose replled thet e petltion wouid be necessa~y and a public heering would be held and the proparty eventually candemned tf agreement was not resched. ~ Councilmember Baumyartner pointed out that if the iot spiit is9ranted and a bulldable lot is creaCed thet th~ City 1s 119bie for bringing in lmprovemants. August 10, 1977 Page 4 E ' S nEVIEW OF EXISTiNG OFF-STREET PARKING CODE FOR A~4ENDMEi~TS - COMMERC[AL VENICIE pARK1NG ~ /-~. i Chairperson Haake stated that the Planning Commission would be reviewing the existinq code far amendments to off-street parking for commercial vehicles. She esked the Commission Members for their comnents since they had been given a list of vehictes and tocatlons in Che communlty and hed had a chance to view them. Commission Member Burmeister stated that she felt the situation was very discouraging and foit it was very irritating and that she had driven by one location where a semi was parked close to a corner and blocked the view. She stated that sho did not feel that big crucks belong is a residentiai area. A1so, she stated that while some trucks did look ok appearance wise, some did lnok very ratCy end did nat belong in a residen- tiai area. Comnission Member ~4ackeben pointed out a semi parked at a bouse on Long Lake Road off the lake and state<1 that it certainly was not ett~•active, and that two houses down from iti was a motor home that he alsn did not feel was attractive. However, he ques- tioned how one cou7d tell one person that they could not park their vehicle in their yard ff their neighbor, recreationa7 vehicle could be parked there. Commission Durmeister stated that if 7t was felt both commercial and recreattonel vehicles looked bad, why not try to ellminate.at leas~ one of them. Corrmission Member Pedor stated that generally motor homes are much quieter than large trucks, which Commission Member Mackeben stated was a noise ordinance problem, not a parking problem. • Chairperson Haake Gointed out that mar~y af the vehicles could also fall into the ,~unk category. Co~mnlssion Member Blanchard suggrsted that a motion could be made, stating that nothing over l~s tons be allowed antess tt is a recreational vehicle. The 1~ ton was ~ust a starting figure and could be changed to encompass other cRtegorles. Chairperson Haake poirted out that dum~p trucks could weigh under 1~ ton ard thus wouid be aI]owed, Corunission Member Fedor asked what the Commissior felt its u7tlmate goal was, to pet; down to Allowing 3ust small pickup trucks and vans in the City? Gnairpcrson Haake staCed that she hud di~iven by one house that -iad a tractor trafler parked Sn the drivew~y and annther one in the garage that was being worked on and ~id not feel it was attractive at a17. She aiso drove by anuther house that had at teast four different types of vehictes in the yard, some of which were rusted, one pickup with a wheei missing, etc. Commissictn Member Mackeben pointed out that there was a semi thet parks an ta9rchild that takes up most af the w7dth of the street and makes tt very difficult to see other traffic or children. He also stated that it was not attractive at all. Comnission Member Gtnzer stated that he did not see anything attractive about motor homes either. `-~~ Commission MemEer Mackeben stated that he felt they should appTy the same ru7es Lo both commercial and recreatlonal vehicles and that it was not fair to legislate against one and not the other. August 1n, 1477 Page 6 ~ Conmissian Member Burmeister stated thet she felt comnercial vehicles prosented more haxards than recreationet vehicles and that they ere generally driven in or o~~t every day wh91e recreational vehic1es generally go out on weekends on1y. Co~nissian Member Giazer stated that they could not legislate agalnst use rather than impact. Commission Member Fedor stated that the straets in Mounds Vtew have a 3 ton axei weight iimtt and that the lerge trucks would be violating that ttmlt when they drive on them 1n Sprtng. Commission Member Glazer asked ebout tho construction and dellvery trucks that musti cnTe lnto the area in Spring and weigh over 3 ton. Co~nission Member Fedor rep11ed that they sre not aliowed to ~omc in when the weight restrfctions ere on but that they often sneak 1n. Chalrperson Heake recomnended that the Camnis~ion give a recamnendatlon to the City Councll se they can at least try ~o chio away at tl~e prob7em. Commission Member hlackeben repl9ed that at least getting the vahicles off the street would be an impor- tant stap. Councitmember Qaumgsrtner pointed out that ~ust getting the vehicles off tha strnet does not eliminaCe the eyesor~. Cnmmission Membnr Foss stated that comnerciat vehicles create more of an eyesore than do recreation veM cles. Comnission Member elanchard stated thwt comnercial businesses are not allowed in , residentiat areas ahd therefore, comnercial vehicles should not be aliowed, Comnission Member Mackeben stated that the pxopte who ar9 in favor of allowing co~ner- cial vehicles in the City are basically the Lruck drivers, or~the peaple who drlve trucks for a ltving. Ho stated thak 1f he had his home up for sate With a semi ryerked ttext door, he thought it would 6e very diPflcult to seTi his home. Comnission Member Foss stated that most drtvers have a place oF buslness thnt they can leave thelr trucks at and drive home in a car and recommended Lhat they leave tiiem there. Cha?rperson Haake polnted out that 1f an indivlduai was trying ta se11 their home with a truck parked next to 1t, very'iikeiy another tiruck driver mignt buy it and soon there wou7d be trucks atl over the nelghborhood and Mounds View would become knp~n for attow- in~ trucks. 5he stated thnt something must be done ebout the situation and that ' ca~nercial and recreationat vehicles should not necessarlly be treated the same. Commission Membar Mackehen stated that the Commission must reme~nber the person who has ~heir tiving tied ~p in their truck. Commission Member Hurmeis~er stateQ that atmosk everyone would hsve a place where th~y coutd ieave their semi rather then drive 1t home. Commisston Member Glazer lefit the meeting at 8:30 PM. Commissicn Member Foss asked if enyone had checked tv se~: what surrounding comnunities alinwa~. OPficial Rose replled that he hed checked surrounding comnunitles when Lhe recreational vehicles were he1ng discussed an~ had passed that informatiort on to the `"' Commission. , °~August 1Q, 1977 Page 6 ~ MSP (Bianchard-BUrmeistor) Lo recommend to tha Councll that they say thaE aqy ~r.hicle over one ton ahasis design that doea not have e recrr.ational veM cle licenso would not be aompetibte end therQfore nut allowed to be parked in a residential area. 6 0.yes 1 ~ay Chalrperson Naake stated that she woutd like her letter to the City Council of July 29, 197i, explaining Allen Yepper's dlsmissal from the Planntng Commtssion on Ju7y 20, ly%7 be edded to ihe minutes of toni ghts meeting nnd thet the reply from John Pickar, dated August 9, 1977 also be included, wfiich pertained to the'City Ordinance 215 regarding confllct of interesC on the Pianning Com~nission and City Councll. Sire staCed thot sh~ now knows Aow to deai with any confitct of interest situetfon which may arlse in the future. She als~ stated that Mr. Zepper concurred wlth her decision at the time she spoke to him at the July 20 meeting thaC he not participate as a canmissian member during the discussion. Comnission Memb~r Mackeben staCed that he felt each Commission Member should be eilowed to reniain seated if he ~id not have a financial conflict of interest end be altnwed to state the9r thoughts on any issue. ; '; Councitmembsr Baumgartner stated that Attorney Meyers hed said that the Counctl or Conmission members have the right to get out and pound the drums en an issua. ' Cnnmisslon Maclceben ques N oned the comments fram the City Council that a Pianniny i Commission meeting was not held Juty 13 due to lack of a querem. He stat~d that ~ 1t wes ptanned in advance that there would net be e meeting. ~ Councllmembaw Baumpartner replied that the reason the meeting was not planned was theC they knew in advance there would not be a quarem. dfficisl Rose requested Commission Members to review the issue of home occupations 1n single famlly restdenttal areas and be prepared to diicuss it at their next meeting. I ~ Commission hlember Foss stated that Colum6la Heights had a good det'inition for home occupations 9n a singla famlly resid~ntial area end recer~nended that they flnd out I how 1t reads. ~ Comnisslon Member Burme9ster asked why the issue wes bafng hroueht up again. Officia7 P.ose'peplled thet it was being bpought up due to current probleme with the dePinition and intant. MSP (Fass-kackeben) to ad~ourn the meeting at 8:45 PM. , 6 aye¢ Respectfully submitted, Pameta Young Recordtng Secretary , ~tr/