Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1978-05-24 PC Minutesp ~., ~ PROCEEDIN~S Of THE PLANNING COMMIS510N ' CITY OF MOUNOS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA A regular meeting of the Mounds View Pianning Cortmisslon was calied to order et 7:30 PM on May 24, 1978 at the Mounds View City Na11, 2401 Nighway 10, Mounds View, Minnesota 66112. Members Present: Ghairperson Haake Comntssion Member Fedor Garrnission Member Glazer Commi:ston Member Bu>meister Carmission Member 8lanchard Cwrmission Menber Foss Comnisslon Member quan Also Presentc Building and Zohing Official Rose Chalrperson Haake ±ntroduced newly appointed Comnission MemSer Quan to the members of the Pianning Commission. Chairp~rson Haake stated the minutes of the May 10, 1978 meeting wore approved ,~as read. i~,~ MqJOR SUBOIVISION AND REZONING REQU@ST OF GLEN KARLEY - 2809 COUNTY ROAD I MSP (Giazer-burmeister} to remove thts item from the table. 7 eyes Official Rose reported thet at the last maeting the question came up of where the private services were for Lot 2, and the applicant has since drawn it on his preliminary p1at. The Plan~inq Commission also requested that the ~pplicant t y t m ke Lot t come as close as possib7e to a code conforming 'ot, ;~ith 100 frontage ~or ~up~ex construction. Official Rose reported that the applicant has found it moPe pract9cal not to change the frontages along Silver Lake Raad, due to the locatton of the prlvate service. The existing lot configuratior. wiit aliow the app1lcnnt to build both R-2 lots without the need of a setback variance. ~fficial Rcse added that additional utility would not be neces>ary as the Cit,y pians to tnstall a water main aloug the Silver Lake Road frontage. Comnission Member Burmeister asked how far the sewer 11ne was from the proposad building. OPi'iciaT Rose replied that 1t was 5' and that with the depth of tfie proposed foundatlan and the depth of the 71ne, there should be no probiem. Bob Helsetfi, a representative of the Task Force asked how far the duplex would be _ from the read and 9f thepe would be ample parking. Chairperson Haaice repited that ~~jt will be 45' froR County Road I and 35' from Silver Lake Road and that there ~,NOUId be amp7e parking. May 24, 1978 Page 2 MSV (foss-Blanchard) to recaimend epprovat of the request of G1en Karlen at 2809 ~ County Road I~ith th? Pollowing provistons, rezone Lnts 1 and 3 from R-1 to R-2, allowing also a var9ance for Lot 1 oP 10' frontage and on Lot [, ~ronthig on County Road I, a 5' variance. The reason for the varisnces ts thnt there 1s a snHer easeinent and sewer line running through Lot 3, which p~esents a hardship. 7 ayes Comnission Maniber Glazer stated that the Planning Ca~unission dues reatize that the rscommendatian is at variance wiCh the Comprehensive Plan which still carries this arca as R-1. Howover, much of the surrounding 7and is R-2 or higher and traffic patter~s ape such that R-1 does not appear to be favored, It is recomnended that thQ Comprehensive P1a~ be amended now to confotm with tho Pianning Carmission recannendation. Chairperson Naake stated that the rezoniog of the property is requested because oP the nzture of the future development on the east side of Silver Lake Raad and that previous aphroval has been extended by the Planning Comnission far some tots soutfi oF the area fronting on S11ver Lake Road to go to R-~ status. Comnisston Member Glazer quesY.ioned what type o•P duplex wauTd be going 1n. Mr. Karlen replted that it would be a split entry with the garage caning o~et the front, and that each unit would be a two ievei unit, with a pitched roof. Commission Member Glazer asked iF the duplexes would be rentai property. Mr. Karlen replled they wouid be as he witt own them and does not plan on sel7ing. ,.~ Mr. Helseth asked where the drainage would go. Official Ros~ replled that there I ~is an axisting catch basin on County Road I and Silver Lake Road and that drainage '^~ will be directed that way. Mr. Kar7en ac~ded that he had checked wiLh the County and the cuiverL• on the property will go under the road. BUYLDING ADDITION REOUEST OF SMITN TRANSFER CORPO{tATION Official Rose reported that the applicant has requested a building permit for an 80'4" x 50' extens9on of theip exisL9ng loading dock. Under Mounds Yiew Cade 59.07, the P]anM ng Comnission and City Council must review these matters and enter the appl9cant into a deveiopment agreemenE with Che City. Official Rose added that ali building set6acks are adequately met and that the exist9iig number of parking spaces adequately meeCs eode t~equirements with the new ~ddition. The additian will be typical o,° the existing structure in screeni~ig and building appearance. OPficial Rose added that addiitonat screening is noC required, due to the location of the addition but th~t StaP4 ha5 noYe~i that the origina7 screening requtred is not a77 ir~ livtng st&tus and would recomnend that the arypiicant be reqUired to adhere to the origin~l planCings s~hedule by repiacing dead or mtssing ptanttngs. Farreli Johasan, representative of the architectural firm for Smith TransPer stated that they had not p7anr.ed to ignore the plantings and that a gopd many oP the trees had be2n damaged by peuple and that othErs had disd stnre the soil candlttons were not gond. I~e added that he would suggest another type of growth rather than oine trees, such as Russian Olives. 1 ~""~Comnission Member Burmeister asked if the piantings caould have a hetter chance op surviving 14 they were brought down ~rom tfie fiop aP the herm, Mr, ~'ohnson replled that ihe original trses were staggered and not aiT a2re on Che top. May 24, 1978 Page 3 ~°`Ufficial Rose stated t1~at the additio~ would not be adding any impervlous surface as the existing area is atready blacktop. Cortmission Member Quao. asked what type of dreinage eysL•e~r would he used, Official Ross t•eplied that Chey do h~ve an existing catch basin system which will take care of the runoff. MSP (Burmeister-Glaxer) to recomnend epproval of the building permit for Smith Trensfer Por an 80'4" x 50' extension of the existing loading do:k with the stipulation that the appiicant meet the originel plantings schedule and reptace any dead or missing ptantings and maintain such ptanting<, 7 ayes Cmm~ission Member Gtazer stated he felt R~assian Olives wuuld he the mnst desirable p]anting. CURB CUTS FOR JO1N7 DRIYEWAYS - SUNNYSIDE ROAD BETWEEN COUNTY ROAD H AND WOODCREST DRIVE Off,~iai Rose r~ePorted tha~ a series of dup7exes located on the west side of Sunny- side Road between County Road N and Woodcrest Drive had ~oint curb cuts installed at the time of the street installations and to date, the driveways have never been paved ared Staff, tugether wtth the housing code and driveway ordinance, is attempting to require the paving of the driveways and a parking area. Staff is requlring it pri~narily because of the grade and Cfie enormaus amount of sand which ie washed onto the streets a~nually. Staff has re~earched Lhe pro~ect, the engineer's notes on the '"'~ insCallation and the Council's minutes partaining to the pra~ect, and to date has ~~~not been ab1e to comprehend why ~oint curb cuts were installed. Upon requesting the paving of the driveways, the owners have requested that they be able to have ~o9nt driveways and curb cuts, Variances are required for drlveways which would ba lxate~ closer Chan 5' to the property lines. It may have been ths inCention af the City at Che time the profect was installed to a11ow foint cur~ cuts ar~d Staff would request that it be elther reaffirmed, varisnces be granted or require the nwners tu insta7l separate driveways to meet code rEquirements. Official Rose added that in the past the Planning Gomnission has allowed abutting driveways for single ~ami'iy usages. Staff at that time recomnended against it and would do Lhe same for this request. Staff anticipates no serious problems with the duplex usage versus tho single famity usage of ad~oining driveways. Also, ~oint driveways of this nature could cause problems v~ith anow removal and pai•king encroachment. Conmission Member Fedor asked what the distnnce was between the houses. Official Kosa replied tViat it was approximatety 60'. Chairperson Haake asked how large the lots were. Official Rose repited that they var9ed from 99', 100' to 103'. Mr. Helseth asked if there was an ordinance regarding how close the parking can be from the duplex. Chairperson Haake stated that the ordinance is written to allow asphalt right up to the bu9lding. Comnission Member F?;dor stated that R-2 developments generaiiy are designed now to Pit , into an R-1 nefghborhood and that a~oint drivee~ay wouTd not Pit in. He adr!ed that he fett it would 2ook ]ike aparbnents or rental property. ~ Official Rase pointed out ~hat over half the rentat property nou is owner occupied. . Y May 24, 1978 page 4 ~omnission Member Fedor asked thet if there was a~o1nt driveway, if the impervious ~rea woutd be the sama as 1P there were two driveways, Offlcial nose replied thet r~athing is peVed with the exi~ttng driveways and the difference between having separate or ,loint driveways and perking would be minimal. Commission Member 9lazer stated he had e problem with ,~otnt driveways since he Pe1t the houses were getting too close together, He aiso added that he felt more developers woutd be holding onto their property. Commission Member Burmeister stated she felt owners were maintaining the buildings much better now, du9 to their value. Comnission Member Foss asked tha reason why the owners had requested ,~oint driVeweys, Official Rose replied that they now have ,~oint curb cuts which they would like to keep and that if a~oint driveway is not approved, they will have to put in a srr,tion of concrete curbing in the center of each ,~oint curb cut. Caimfssion Member Foss pointed out that separate driveways reduce the amount of front yard. Chairpersan Haake T•eplled thnt it would only reduce it by 5'. Commission Member Fedor pointed out that if singie driveways were required, there wouid be 14 curb cuts alon tbe road. OfPi :l Ruse replted that one optiun that is avallable !s to have a~oint curb cut an6 then have the dr!veway spiit with a fence or some Lype of divider down the center. ,m~""'~ Chairperson Naake pol7ed the Comnission Members for their apinions. ( CamniSssion Member Foss stated he would prefer ailowfng ,~oint curb cuts. Comnission Member Blanchard stated she wauld prePer a,~oint curb cut at the strPet and then sptit driveways, which woutd ba more in~conformance with the present ar~inance, Ccmnissian Member Burmeister statad she would prefe~ the ~oint curb eut at the street and then a spTit driveway, and if that was not possible, then she would 11ke separate cur6 cuts. Carsnission Member G7azer stated he would lika s~parate curb cuts siiice he felt it wou7d p~•event a lot of disputes by the property owners. Comnission Member Fedor stated ±hat he wou7d prefer alluwing ~oint curb cuts in this instance, evpn thnugh he is general7y against them, since in this insCance he can see no alternative. Cam~isaion Member~ Quan stated he would prefer separate curb cuts since he fe]t this might set a precedence, and he would like to maintain a sin9':e family type environment in the neighborhood. Chai°per~un Haake stated that sha wouid prefer separate curb cuts. Commission Member Foss pointed out that with separate drivet~ays the owners would have a driveway on each side of the 1ot. ~„i~Comnissiun Member Quan expressed concern that the green space between driveways would not be kept up, Mey 24, 1978 ~'~15P (alazer-Fedor) Co recomnend egatnst allowin~ ~~int curb cuts and require separate curb cuts. A rollcnit vote was taken: Pagu 6 Ca~mission Member Foss - nay Comnission Menber Blanchard - nay Commission Member durn~eister - nay Comnission Member Glazer - aye Commission Member fedor - aye Comnission Member quan - aye Chairperson Naake ~ aye 4 ayes 3 nays Commission Member Glazer stated that he did not want to see an apartment like appearance and would like to keep the area looking single famlly. Cortmission Member Burmeister stated that a11 the curb cuts would make the neighbor- hood lock all chopped up. Camnission Member Quan stated that he did not bel:eve tfie green space would be kept up unless tt was wrltten {nto an agree~nent with tha owners. He also expressed concern sv~th requ1ring Chis type of change sin~e Joint cuts had 6een approved in 1965. ~!~"~Chairperson Haake stated the owners coutd be required to cnme 6efare the P7anM ng ~~,~Comnis5lon and explsin why they wanted a variance, if the owners were not happy with the declsion for separate curb cuts. Official Rose replled that the issue will be placed before th~ C9ty Councii and if they con4er with the Planning Comnission, the property owners wi11 be required to apply for a vai^iance. NEXT AGENDA ANO pREVI005 CITY COUNCII. ACTIONS Chairperson Haake stated that there tvas a storage shed being bui1t at R1dge Lune and SunrtYSide Road, south of County Road H2 and stated that it saaned to bo very close to the road and nnt in conformance with code. Official Rose replled that he would ~heck on 9t. ChairF•grson Naake stated that the Task Farce has requested minutes af tne Pianning Comnission meetin9s fr~ra February 30, 1978 on. Comnission Member Fedor reviewed the Task Force meeting he had attended and canveyed the comat;ts and statements t~~e Task Force had made reyarding the questions the Planning Commission had asked. Offlcial Rose reparted that there is a,ioint meeting between the City Councll and Task Force qn May 25, !97° st 8 PM at C~ty Hall and ask~d that as many Planning . Cortmission Members as possible attend. Chairperson Haake also asked that as many ,~as posslble attend. Official Rose reported that at the May 22 meeting the City Councit had approved Pro,~ect 1978-3 which included both phases of the proposed feas1b111ty study Por Narthcrtst Par;c. He added that in essence, the motian 1nc1uded ti~z improvements May 24, 1970 Pege 6 ~f County Raed H2, using Stete aid, and the improHement of County Road H. The ; ou7c11 proposed not to essess any of the starm drainage cost tA the citlzens north oP County Road H2, and the only assessment would be approxlmatety ~5.50 j per squere foot for wncrete curb and gutter, wlth allowances prnposed for the ` elderiy and hendicapped. , ~ UFflciel Rese reported thet th~ C1ty Council approved t~e Mounds V1ew Development ~ Comper~y B3 request, per the Planning Cortmissions recarmendation. ~ Officiat Rosa reported that another publlc hearing was held on the trucking urdinence and thn Council upheld the ordinance as such. j Official Rose reported Lhat the City Council approved Scotland Green's building permit and did not require fenctng but did state thet Scotiand Green would be responsible for putting in fencing if they have problems with the park. OFfialal Rose rep~rted that the City Council approved tfie expenditure of $1500 fo~ I further study by Mldwest Planning on the Seven-Eleven report. He added thrt a survey w171 be taken of a canparlGle Tan Thumb store on June 2. Comnisston Manber Glazer asked if the Planning Camiission could do anything about the trench acroas from 8444 Ea~twood Road as the road badty needs repair. OPficial Rose replizd that Staff is actively warking to get sewer'and r;lter contractors te tepair the streets upon a,mpletion of their work, but that the City could put in sane. C1ass 5 ~materiai in the meantime: ~,IMSP (Fedor-Blanchard) to adfourn the meeting at 9:40 PM. 7 ayes Respectfully subnitted, i ~ 1 , Pamela Case Recording'Secretary,I '~ ' . I i ~ ' ( I " . r ~ I' . I J, ~ i i ~ ~ -~"\ f~