Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-06-2000 PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting December 6, 2000 Mounds View City Hall 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Peterson at 7:00 p.m., December 6, 2000. 2. Roll Call Members Present: Chairperson Peterson, Commissioners Berke, Hegland, Johnson, Miller, Stevenson, and Kaden. Members Excused: Commissioner Cerny. It was noted Barbara Thomas is no longer serving on the Planning Commission. Also Present: Community Development Director Ericson, Council Liaison Stigney. Index to Minutes Page Planning Case No. MI00-003 2 Property Involved: 8480 Eastwood Road Consideration of Resolution 641, a Resolution Recommending Approval of a Minor Subdivision Applicant: Richard Cary Discussion of Ordinance 672 Regarding Home Occupations 4 Continued Discussion Concerning the City’s Sign Code 8 Staff Reports / Items of Information 8 Chairperson and Planning Commission Reports 9 Mounds View Planning Commission December 6, 2000 Regular Meeting Page 2 3. Citizen’s Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda There were no citizen requests or comments on items not on the agenda. 4. Approval of Minutes A. November 1, 2000 MOTION/SECOND: Stevenson/Berke. To approve the November 1, 2000 Meeting Minutes as presented. Ayes – 7 Nays - 0 Motion carried. 5. Planning Case No. MI00-003 Property Involved: 8480 Eastwood Road Consideration of Resolution 641, a Resolution Recommending Approval of a Minor Subdivision. Applicant: Richard Cary Community Development Director Ericson explained the property involved is currently 32,738 square feet and zoned R-1. The lot split will create a new 14,202 square foot lot facing old County Road J leaving 18,536 square feet for the lot with the existing home. Both lots would conform to all zoning and subdivision code requirements. The applicant has submitted a certificate of survey describing the proposed subdivision. Community Development Director Ericson indicated Staff believes the minor subdivision request to be straightforward and not to pose any issues other than the need to dedicate perimeter easements. This subdivision is subject to park dedication requirements. The fee is 5% of the land value of the land subdivided, less the value of any land already improved with single-family residential dwellings. The fee would apply to the newly created lot which is 14,202 square feet of land at an assessed value of $13,776. As such, the 5% fee would be $689.00. This fee would need to be paid prior to the City approving the subdivision. Due to the fact there is not a second City Council Meeting in December this matter will be heard before Council at the December 11, 2000 meeting. Community Development Director Ericson indicated Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the minor subdivision with the following stipulations: 1. The applicant shall retitle the survey to read “Certificate of Survey”; Mounds View Planning Commission December 6, 2000 Regular Meeting Page 3 2. The applicant shall revise the survey to indicate five-foot perimeter drainage and utility easements around both lots, except lot lines abutting Eastwood Road and County Road J, which shall indicate ten-foot easements; 3. The applicant shall arrange to execute and to record the drainage and utility easement documents with Ramsey County; and 4. The applicant shall be responsible for the drafting, execution and recording of a utility easement document granting in the favor of Parcel A the south 15 feet of Parcel B for sanitary sewer access. Said document shall be reviewed by the City Attorney and a copy shall be placed on file with the City for reference. Mr. Cary was present at the meeting and offered to answer any questions the Planning Commission had. Commissioner Miller requested a couple of minor typographical corrections to the Resolution. Community Development Director Ericson indicated the Resolution number may be incorrect and asked for the latitude to be able to correct it if necessary. Consent was reached to allow Staff to insert the correct Resolution number if necessary. MOTION/SECOND: Johnson/Miller. To Approve Resolution 641-00, a Resolution Recommending Approval of a Minor Subdivision of 8480 Eastwood Road. Ayes – 7 Nays – 0 Motion carried. [Editor’s note: The correct resolution number is 642-00.] 6. Discussion of Ordinance 672 Regarding Home Occupations Community Development Director Ericson addressed the Planning Commission and indicated this ordinance had been discussed at previous meetings and a recommendation had been sent on to Council for approval. The ordinance changes were discussed at a Council work session prior to being heard at the Council meeting on November 13, 2000. At the November 13, 2000 Council meeting there was considerable public input expressing concern for changes to the ordinance and Council sent the ordinance back to the Planning and Zoning Commission for further consideration. The major item at issue is whether to allow non-resident employees within a home-based business. Community Development Director Ericson indicated he had sent an email concerning the proposed changes to Ordinance 672 to those Mounds View Residents for whom he had email addresses. The overwhelming majority of those surveyed by email expressed the desire to leave the code as it stands and not to change it to allow non-resident employees. Mounds View Planning Commission December 6, 2000 Regular Meeting Page 4 Community Development Director Ericson read the 7 requirements of the Home Occupations Code to the Planning Commission and indicated the Planning Commission may want to consider adding a requirement establishing hours of operation and perhaps limit the amount of square footage allowed to be used for a home-based business. Vicki Kluck, 5467 Adams Street, told the Planning Commission there is a lawn care service business operated out of the home across the street from her. The business has been and continues to be a nuisance for the neighborhood. There are employee vehicles parked in the street causing visibility issues for cars traveling on the street. The vehicles are parked across from her driveway causing access problems for her. During the summer, the hours of operation are from dawn until dark which is 9:30 or 10:00 p.m. After returning home the business owner begins maintenance on the equipment in order to be ready for the following day. This after- hours activity is noisy and disruptive to the neighborhood. There are also a lot of miscellaneous pieces of equipment that are no longer operational scattered about the yard. She requested the Planning Commission not change the ordinance at all or if anything, tighten up the restrictions. Bruce Madsen, 5463 Adams Street, told the Planning Commission he agreed wholeheartedly with the statements of Ms. Kluck. He indicated he is the owner of a home-based business but has no employees and feels employees within a home-based business is not appropriate. He requested the Planning Commission not change the ordinance. Mari Scotch, 7806 Gloria Circle, told the Planning Commission she is the neighbor of the resident at 7800 Gloria Circle operating the business with the four employees. She explained there are too many vehicles parked on the street as the street is very narrow and short and there is not much parking available. This causes her to have problems accessing her driveway. She also explained the employees have couches out back of the residence where they take smoke breaks which is causing a nuisance for the neighbors. She requested the ordinance not be changed. Gordi Kuluvar, 7815 Gloria Circle, expressed concern for the business at 7800 Gloria Circle as it causes too much traffic on the street. He does not want vehicles parked in front of his house all the time. Home-based businesses should be allowed but employees are not necessary as it disrupts the neighborhood. He requested the ordinance not be changed. Terry Wiley, 2277 Oakwood Drive, indicated he felt the ordinance should not be changed as home-based businesses should not have employees. If a home-based business needs to expand to having employees the business should expand to a commercial building. There is plenty of commercial space available within the City and this would be a more proper venue for an expanding business than a residence. He requested the City not loosen restrictions or change the ordinance to be more liberal. Chairperson Peterson explained the reason the ordinance changes were being discussed in the first place was to clean up the ordinance to make it easier to understand. At that time there was a minor change to on or off street parking but the ordinance was not approved by Council and is back before the Planning Commission for discussion and resident input as to whether the ordinance should be changed. Mr. Wiley indicated parking is a huge issue for residents when a business has vehicles parked on the street. Snow removal cannot be done properly which is unfair to the neighbors. He also Mounds View Planning Commission December 6, 2000 Regular Meeting Page 5 believes neighbors have a responsibility to get along with one another and if one is operating a business causing a nuisance to the neighborhood it should not be allowed. Commissioner Johnson inquired as to what types of home-based businesses are operating within the City. Community Development Director Ericson indicated that since home-based businesses are not licensed or registered, the City has no statistics on what kinds of businesses or how many are operating within the City. Commissioner Hegland inquired as to what type of complaints the City receives concerning home-based businesses. Community Development Director Ericson indicated the complaints usually stem from automobile type businesses and lawn and tree care businesses. Commissioner Hegland indicated that a person running a business out of the home is basically asking for a special privilege and should be allowed to do it provided the business does not disturb the neighbors. If the business does disturb the neighbors then the ordinance allows the City to enforce the code to prevent the business from operating. Commissioner Johnson expressed concern for restricting renters from having home-based businesses in homes they rent. He feels this should be something regulated between the landlord and his/her tenant not something the City should restrict. Mari Scotch, 7806 Gloria Circle, questioned whether the City could hold the homeowner and the renter responsible for ordinance violations. Commissioner Johnson indicated he had done some research into whether to allow employees and he feels it would be a huge problem to allow employees. All types of small office businesses would move to the home if employees were allowed. He would like to either leave the ordinance as it is or perhaps allow one employee. Commissioner Johnson also indicated that some of the daycare businesses within the City are required to assign drop off and pick up times in order to keep cars parked on the street to a minimum to comply with the ordinance. He stated that if employees are allowed then the City may need to restrict the hours of operation to protect neighbors. Community Development Director Ericson explained that the City can hold anyone--renter, home-owner, motorists--violating an ordinance accountable and will do so if found to be in violation. Commissioner Kaden expressed a concern for allowing on-street parking as several streets in town are too narrow to accommodate parked vehicles and vehicle traffic. He indicated it may be in a neighborhood’s best interest to have the street made a “no parking” street and then have the police ticket vehicles that park illegally. Mounds View Planning Commission December 6, 2000 Regular Meeting Page 6 Roger Stigney, 8400 Eastwood Road, expressed concern for home-based businesses which have employees come to the home and park their personal vehicles for the day while working offsite for the business. He does not think he should have to have employee vehicles parked in front of his home all day. Commissioner Miller indicated if no employees were allowed then there would not be employee vehicles parked on City streets all day. Commissioner Stevenson suggested requiring the home-based business to have its employees park in front of that residence only. Chairperson Peterson expressed a concern for enforcement of restrictive parking. Mr. Stigney said he felt the City could prohibit home-based businesses from allowing their employees to park on City streets all day. Chairperson Peterson indicated there would be a major enforcement problem which would add up to more expense for the City. Commissioner Hegland indicated the City would only need to enforce the code if there is a complaint. Chairperson Peterson indicated if there were hours of operation limitations and there were repeated problems the City would need to look into it. Mr. Wiley indicated if the City did not allow on-street parking then there would not be an enforcement issue. Commissioner Stevenson commented that when on-street parking was discussed it was his impression the City was assuming those cars would be for clients of the business not employees. Commissioner Johnson inquired as to how the City should handle a home-based business with just one owner or one whose wife usually did the books but went on maternity leave who needs a temporary employee to help out. Commissioner Hegland indicated on-street parking should be for clients only. Ms. Scotch indicated there are a variety of ways to get help with your business that do not involve bringing an employee into the home-based business. She expressed her concern that with the growing number of home-based businesses the City needs to be careful about loosening restrictions to allow for employees. She also indicated she would like to see the current ordinances more strictly enforced so that someone else does not end up in her situation where there is someone who has been violating the home-based business ordinance for two and a half years and getting away with it. Chairperson Peterson indicated he did not want to allow any non-resident employees. Mounds View Planning Commission December 6, 2000 Regular Meeting Page 7 Commissioner Hegland indicated there may be a reason to allow one non-resident employee but there would need to be parking restrictions if the City did so. Chairperson Peterson indicated he would like to leave the housekeeping changes to the ordinance to clean it up but not change the ordinance to allow employees. Community Development Director Ericson inquired as to whether the Planning Commission would like to limit the hours of operation. Commissioner Stevenson indicated he would like the ordinance to stay as it is. The residents have spoken and the vast majority of residents do not want changes and he believes the City should not change to allow non-resident employees. Community Development Director Ericson asked if the Planning Commission desired to eliminate on-street parking altogether. Commissioner Miller indicated two cars for either on or off street parking are currently allowed by code. Commissioner Hegland inquired how the City would enforce the no on street parking requirement. Community Development Director Ericson indicated enforcement would be on a complaint basis. Chairperson Peterson read through the requirements of the home-based business ordinance and asked the Planning Commission if any changes to each requirement needed to be made. MOTION/SECOND: Stevenson/Berke. To Change Ordinance 672 to Prohibit On-Street Parking Associated with Home-Based Businesses within the City. Ayes – 7 Nays – 0 Motion carried. Chairperson Peterson inquired if there were any more issues concerning Ordinance 672 the Planning Commission should consider. Community Development Director Ericson indicated that other cities do prohibit specific types of businesses as indicated in the survey, and asked if this was something the Commission wanted to reconsider. Consent was reached to not further change Ordinance 672. Mr. Stigney suggested in this booming e-trade economy there is a potential for a home-based distributorship business that may generate several UPS or RPS trips per day. He suggested the Planning Commission may want to consider setting a restriction on that type of activity. It was the consent of the Planning Commission to address the e-trade issue should the need arise. Mounds View Planning Commission December 6, 2000 Regular Meeting Page 8 Community Development Director Ericson indicated that due to the change in the Ordinance Staff would draft a Resolution for consideration at the next Planning Commission meeting. 7. Continued Discussion Concerning the City’s Sign Code Community Development Director Ericson indicated the timeline for proceeding with the changes to the sign ordinance was developed based on projected light agendas for the Planning Commission and may need to be amended to accommodate the schedule. Mr. Ericson suggested Staff could go through the definitions section and provide input on those definitions Staff feels need to be revised. Commissioner Miller indicated it seemed the definitions included too much information that should be located somewhere else in the Code. Community Development Director Ericson suggested the Planning Commission review the documentation on the sign code for discussion at the next Planning Commission meeting. Chairperson Peterson indicated the sign code documentation received in the packets appeared to be around 10 years old but still useful. He also indicated there was a good mix of documentation including some slanted toward the City and some slanted toward the sign companies. He complimented Staff on providing well balanced documentation. 8. Staff Reports/Items of Information A. Previous Council Action Community Development Director Ericson reported Ordinance 675, an Ordinance rezoning the Mermaid Parcels from B-3 Highway Business to PUD was approved at the November 27, 2000 City Council Meeting. Construction will begin as soon as documents are finalized with Rice Creek Watershed District. Community Development Director Ericson reported Council discussed at its last work session a wetlands alteration permit for two properties in the 7300 Block of Knollwood Drive, the Highway 10 Steering Committee and request for proposals, and a building up for lease in the Mounds View Business Park wishing to be rented by what Staff believed to be a trucking freight terminal. B. Items of Discussion Community Development Director Ericson indicated he had received a letter from Barbara Thomas resigning from her seat on the Planning Commission as she was elected to the City Council. Mayor Coughlin indicated at the last City Council meeting there was a vacancy and the City is accepting applications. The application can be found on the website, can be picked up, mailed, or faxed to any resident interested in applying for the vacant seat. Mounds View Planning Commission December 6, 2000 Regular Meeting Page 9 Council Liaison Stigney thanked the Planning Commission for their professionalism and hard work on the issues presented to them. He indicated he has been impressed with the way the Planning Commission “digs” into the issues before making recommendations to Council. Community Development Director Ericson indicated Staff would have a resolution for consideration adopting the meeting dates for 2001 at the next meeting. 9. Chairperson and Planning Commissioners’ Reports There were no reports. 10. Adjournment to Agenda Session There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chairperson Peterson adjourned the meeting at 9:20 p.m. (The meeting immediately adjourned to the Agenda Session) Respectfully submitted, Jim Ericson Community Development Director Transcribed by: Joan Lenzmeier TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.