Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1978-11-29 PC MinutesPAOCEEDIN48 OF TNE PLANNIN~ COMMI88ION ~ CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMBEY COUNTY, 6fINNE80TA A ragular maetix~ of the Mounde View Planning Commieeion wae oell~d to nrde: by Chairpereon HaRke at 7i30 PM on November .:4, 1970 at the Mounde View City Hell, 2401 Highway 10, Mounde View, Minnesota 55112. Members preeent~ Chaixpereon Haake Commieaion Member Hlanchard Cemm3ssion Memher P!±rmeiater Comrttieaion Member Fedor Commi.eeion Member. Foee Commiesian Member Glazer Commieeion Member puan Aleo Preeehts Planning Teohnioian Kampel J MSP ([~aake-BUrmeister) to appr~ve the mi.nutes of the Nnvember B, 1970 meeting as read. 7 eyee ~ 1 Mr. Kampel reported that the appliaant hae requeated a building ''~"~ germit to aonatruat a three uni,t multiple £amily dwelling at 7824 Etigewood Drive. Planning coneidexations includa thati both the exiacing zoning nnd Comprehetteive Plan danote R-3 mellum density residential ueaye. The lot con~orme to minimum area r6quirements and the proposed triplex meote the minimum building aetback requirementa. Water, eanitary eewer and atorm sewer eervices are 'available to the lot. All drainage should.be directed toward Edgewood Drive. Conaret~ ourb and gutter are required at drivewsy,and off-stseet parkinq locaeions. At the time ef application, this triplex wae being aonsidered under townhouee developme:,t, with a r.equiremant of eix non-driveway, off-etreet parkinq Ap~oes. Just prior to the meeting, StaPf 81e- oovered that- tho pac~paeea triplex d1d nnt meet townhouee requiremente, ns each individual unit mubL be owner occupie3. In this cNee, only one, if any, of the unite will be owner ocoupied--the r~at wiil he rented. The triplex muat now be conaidered a multip~e tamily ~lwelling, roquiring ef~ht o£f-etreat parking spacae. The plea aoea no~ maet the maximum of one curb cu*_ requirement far each 125 Eeet af etreet frantage. A variance ie zequired for allowance of two curb ruta. Mr. Kampbl recommended a revision of the ai~e plnn layout to aacom- modate eii ufi-atroot,pa=kinq area fnr e minimum of eix rere prior to , approval, and hardehi.p reasoning Eflr the numbez of curb auts i! (,~ a reaammandation of approval ie giver~. Novembar 29, 1979 Page 2 ~ Mr. Beneo~i, of Olympia Consttuction Company, etaled that he would give h1e ~'ull cooperation to the Ci~y in order to work this out, but he coui~ find no way e~ound having two curb cuCs. Chairperaon Haake aekad Mr. Senson where hw aould qet the extra parki.ng epacea required by code. Pir. 8enean replied that there ie eight Eeet Eor ad~ition o£f-etreet parking beeide the driveway on the north side of the property. Thie area could be paved and would aacommodaEe four care (parked parallel) wi~h no problem. Commiesian Member Burmeiater said ehe felt that too much conEuaion would bs created by parallel parking along the side o: the driveway. Chairperaon Haake added that the tha spacFS would have to be ,iaeh merkad. Commieaion Member Bur~aiater askad i£ therc was roum Eor additional parking behind the building. Mr. Hensen replied there wae no pcseible way of creating additionai parking apace behind th=. building withouti destroying the back yard. Commiasion Member Quan asked 1E the garaqes could be move~ toqether, eliminating the north driveway and expandiny the paved axea on the aouth driveway. Mr. Heneon rep2ied that moving the buildinge uver ~~uld de~rive one oE the unita of back yard space entirely. He drew a sketch of the proposad buildings, illustrating that if he ,~~ moved the north yarage ovar and. altered tha driveways, that tha i north driaeway woul~ project past the oorner of the building about '~+r~ 26°, completely depriving one unit of any back yard space and tekinq away li2 aE the middle unit's back yas8. Commiaeion Member Burmeiater aeked why thie oould not be claseified ae a townhouse, thus removing the nezd for two required parking apacee. Mr. Kampel Axplained that, according to Mounds View code, a townhouae had to be comg~7.etely owner occupied, while in thia tr.iplex; two of the units would moat likely be rented, and only oc~e would be owner occupied. Chairpersan Haake read the aection o~ the code pertaini.;ig to open space reqv.irements. 625 equare feat of open spaca is required £or each unit. Mr. Rampel atatad that there was more than enough open epaca because of the large front yard. More parking could be put in back of the building without violating open epace requirements. Mr. Bensen repeated that additional parking in the back yard would destroy the ueabler.ese of the back yard, the effectiveneaP of the patio doors and the ealability of the entire prooerty. Commiseiun MembAr Burmeister atated that according to chapter 40.05 sub. C o£ the Mounds View Code, the garaqe aetbaek oP an R-3 unit when abutting residentia.l proparty muat be 20 feet £rom th~ lot line. Mr. Henaen repl3ed that hia property did not abutt reaidential , property. Mr. Rampe2 e~ated there was a Eour plex to the south oE ',~ the property. Chairpereon Haake stnted that even an R-4 high riae apartment buildinq would ba conoidered rQS.idehtial. November 29, 1978 Faye 3 ~ Commiosion Member Quan suggeate~4 9taff do some homework aad come up with an alternative to the parking problem. Chairpereon tt~<slce aqreed with the homework suggeetion, and aeked the commieeionere if they felt it imparative that they Eind axtra room in the back of the building or could they feel comEortable with Mr. eenaon'a auggeetion oP para11e1 parking along the ei,de oE the north driveway. She also aeked if they would coneidc~r counting the axtsa garaga spnce ae one of the excra parking apacea required. Gonuniesion Member Poea said he Eelt the plan was sufficient as iti stands, ae thera were on2y going to be three families li.ving there with approx:mately two cars per family. Ne etated it was doEinitely pre£erablo to chop~,ing up the back yard. Co~mniesion Membox Glazar said he araw no problem with the builder's plan. He agread with Commiseion Member Foss that thora wou7.d probably be no more than six cars on the property at one tima snd this would not create any problems. Commiseion Member eurmeister stated she was againet parking along the aide of the driveway, as it was a potenh.ial hazard. Thu con- tractor shouZd provide addit:Sonul parking. She also atated that hoo many multiple dweZlings do not aeem t:o have adequate parking, afid iF thie parti,uular parkitr~ eitiuation cannot he eolc'ed, maybe ~a.~ a duplex could he coneidered instoad of T tri~lex. Commiesion Member Blanchard aaid ehe would prefer to eas the parking in back of the building. Commiesion Member Quan said he did not Eesl comfortable with thia situation, There ar,e too many impervious aur£aces on the small lot, and a lack oE green epace to absorb water. He atated ha would like Co aee some alterna~ives. Commisaion Member Fedar eaid he felt they were attempting to treat this ae an overgrown duplex. Ae the Commioeion had never addreseed a three uttit bui2ding before, Yhey were having di£ficulty d~ciding how it ehould be.treated. He added that the parking area would have to be hoth acreaned and curbed, aacordLng to cuda. Chairperson Haake eaid ahe didn't Eeel that would apply in this case. Commisaion Member Quan aeked if Staff had looked around at other triplexee in the City. Mr. Kampel replisd that he knew o£ no othere. Chairperson Haake stated that tt~e sievelopment meeta al]. code requi.re- ments except £or the off-street parking apaces and the curb cuts. An altarnative to the parallel. parking apaoes ahould ba found, ae viaitors to the occupante must also be considered. 9ha xc~aed that i,~ ahe would like Eo see aome more work dnne on this. Nov~mber 29, 1978 Pege 4 ~ ~6 ~¢uail-~urntci9teY) to tnble the matter for Puxthar ooneideration. Commieeion Member Burmeiatsr etated that it wae up to the dsveloper tn crm9 up with a eolutia~ tio the parking probiam. Commiaeion M~~ttber puan cautloned ayalnat too muah impervioue area, aa it gave an apAeeranae oE an apertmant complex. Mr. Henaen atated that he had diaouaeed thie repentedly with hie arahitocts and iE they moved the garagea to oreate additional parkinq St would deetray to~al baok yard ueage for the separate Pamilias, Ch~lrperaon Heake suggeeted havinq one Eoux aar garage with ona drivaway. M~. eenson replied that this would ati11 leave only one unit with a full back ysrd, the remaining two units would have no baak yard at all, plue baoking up in the driveway would be difziault, as spaoe w~uld etill be limitad. He added that moving c+ne garage hould reduce the back pard apbce o~ two of the unite to Eive to e~gnt feet in dapth. Motion to kable the matter aarriecl. 6 ayee 1 nay ~ Mr. Bensen etatecl he did not want to table thia becavae of the ~~~ effect any changee would have on the back yard. Chairpezaon Haake asked Mr. Hensen if ha wantnd to go aheafl with a motion to approve or d~sapprnva, as cho plana atan3. Mr. Bensen rsplicd that he did. MSP(Glezer-FOSe) to rescind the pravious mntion tabling Olympia Conetruction's development request. 7 $yee Mr. 8enaen asked why the parking problems and other points oP discusei.on were only beinq raiaed at this time. Chairpereon Haake explained that the Planninq Commiesion Boee nvt meet ahead oP time to diecusa agenda iteme and that they usually racnive their information pnekages only a few daye prior ta the meeting. MBP (Haake-BUrmeiater) to recammend to the Cc,uncil deni~l of Olympia Construetion Company's xequeat, as tho off-stredt parkit~g is inadequate Eox n three uniL• davelopment. 7 ayea " SECTION 8 FAMILY HOUSING PROJECT ~ r ~ Chairperaon Heake read portiuns of the aover letter s'rom Metro- ~ politan Council, expleininq their propoesl for a 4B unit hnuaing r ,~~~+, project to be located between Greanfiel8 Avenue nnd propaao8 ~ ~7 St. Stephens 8treet south ~f CounCy Road T and north oP ~ronson ~ Drive. Tha development wc~,ld conta'_n 4 one bedroom un:.tsr 20 two bedroom unite, 22 thrbe bedroom unite and 2 four bedznom unitn, inelu8ing 2 one 6edroom unite deaiqned apecifically for uee by Novembar 29, 1918 Peqe 5 ~ handioapped. The letter also aeked for aommente from the community regarding the elPeat thte houainq projeat miqht have on t•he oommunity. A memo frnm the euilding end Zoning Officis~ indiaated that the Planhinq Co~niseion's oommenta ehould enoompase nee9 within our cnmmunity, loaation, exi~ting zoninq, propo~ed Cnmpre- heneive 91an deeignar,:lon and how thia would atEeat Mounde View's housing invontory. Chairpereon Hnake neked iF anyone knew to whom the houeinq would be avallable. Commiesion Momber 8lanchard st:ated that ahe had called Met Counail an~ h~d bee» tald it weuld be available Eor low and middie incoma people. Commisaion Mzmber Fedor aeked i£ that waen't law land. Commiasion Member Quan reported that the soil in that area wae typical of moat Mounds View ~oil, urban land, 0-38 slope. He added thet the water tabl,e waa 2-4 PeeC. Commiseion Member Burmeieter queekionad whethes mora apartmente in Mounde View were neceeeary. ~ Ed Lanz, 537~ St. Stepligne Otroet, aaked what type oE units they wou].d be. Comm:eaion Member Burmeietar repliad that thera would be 14 wooA frame et:vetureaJ 8 apartmente and 6 garaga build~nga. Chairpezeon Haake pointed out that the bNildinge were desefibed in i the letter ae toomhouee unike, but that they did net £~t Mounds ' View's detinition of townhouaee. ; Chalrperson Haake eugqested tliat a list of questione be put toqether ~ to be answered by Met Council, so that tha Commiaeion can reapond better to the Council's zequest at a future meeCfn~. . Can a copy o.f the building and plot plans be obtalned for reviewal? . What are the exact soil conditiona? . Whak plane for drainage would be made7 . Approximat~ly how many etudenta will tihzre ba and what lmpaat would thia have on our echoole3 . Will thare be adequate fire pro~ecti~n7 ~ . Are there adaquate eewer lines to handla a project ~ this e~ze? r . Wiil the pzopoaed eirport expaneion hava an imp3et on thie prnject7 ~ . what will the trafPic impnct ~~7 ~ . S4hnt will be tha extent of iinpervioue surfaces7 ~ . What aocial/economic impact will thie have on the community7 ~~/ November 29, 197d r t•trs. Na2scn oE GL. Bt~~hati~o 9tro3t ocid that ~ ditah running through the properby. Duane Mo Road, ateted thati 8ranoh S of Judicial Ditoh tihat aree. /"\ ~J Page 6 thare s:ae a 8zeins3= Carty, 80G0 Y~ong Lake N1 wae looare8 in Commieeion Member eurmeieter queerioned if Mounde View hea a need For more low inoome houeing. Commieeion Membar Foee naid #het Meunde 9ie+w hnea~t any houeinq faatlitiee like the one propoesd. Mr. ~io Certiy etnted that, ae nn axemple o! low inoome houeing, the Commie~,ion ehould look at the houeing on Hrighton Lene, Red Onk Dr~.ve and Eunnyaide Ran3 bet~veen CounCy Road H and Woodoreet Drive. Thie ie not aotually l~w inonmo houeing, but they ere v~ood Preme rentnl unitu whioh havo deteriorated dua ~o laok ot ma.~dtonenae. Mr. Lunz eaid he felt that apnrEment type buildin~~ wouidn't Pit in with the reet of 8t. Stephene Htireat, which ie n11 eingle Eamily homea. He exnreeead aorwern that thl.e will lower the pro~erty value oP hie homa. Chairpereon Naak.9 pointed out that the prnperty ie preeently aon9d R-3 ahd that there are apartment buildings to the eaet and weet already. Chancoe are that the area would evenCually be devuloped into apartment buildinge anyway, in whiah aaee the townhouse type 8evelapmer.t deecribed in the let~.ex Erom Met C,ounoil would probably be more aesthetically pleased bhan three etory apartment buildings. NEXT AGENDA AND PREVIOUB CITY COUNCIL RCTIOfTB Iti wes neke8 iP there would be a P1.anning,Commieeion mee~:ing •, durinq hte week between Christmas and Naw Yaar~s. Chairpexeon , Haake said she did not know'Eor eure, but there woulfl be a meetiriy- the sacond Wedneeday in Aeaember. , ~ ThA Commiseion membe~re and Mr. McCarty diecueaed the propoeed airport expaneion in generel. MSP (8urmeieter-Glazer) to adjourn the meeting at 9s3C p.m. Asspsetfully submitted, 8haroxi Ackarmann Reoording 8ecretary ~,i tiM~ ' REVIBION OP' NOV~MH~R 2°~~ 1978 PLANNINa GOMMY88;[AN ~ ~ `.~ I Page 6r third paragraph~ Mr. MeCarty etated ~hnt, iE the Citiy approved new multiple dwelling atruoturee, i!: ehould be eure bo require garagee, adequate parkinq, sareenina and plantinge opm nteWhich aen ba pra~erlYainnintainedlr . V , ... .. ,_..,..~_. M::,..„ . ..;.