Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-07-2009 MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AGENDA October 7, 2009 -- 7:00 P.M. 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Minutes: A. August 5, 2009 4. Citizens Requests and Comments Relating to Planning and Zoning Issues Not Already on the Agenda. (Before speaking, please give your full name and address for the minutes.) 5. Planning Cases None 6. Other Planning Activity A. Discuss possible development project at Premium Stop site, 2390 County Highway 10 B. Review Code Amendment – Voting Requirements for Zoning Amendments C. Review Code Amendment – Zoning Code Penalties 7. Next Planning Commission Meetings: A. October 21, 2009 B. November 4, 2009 8. Adjourn to Agenda Session Agenda Session 1. Review Minutes: a. August 19, 2009 2. Staff Reports a. Upcoming Planning Cases 3. Chairperson and Planning Commissioners’ Reports 4. Meeting Conclusion PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting August 19, 2009 Mounds View City Hall 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 ______________________________________________________________________________ 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Chair Stevenson at 7:00 p.m. August 19, 2009. ______________________________________________________________________________ 2. Roll Call Members Present: Chair Stevenson; Commissioners Cramblit, Lang, Meehlhause, Miller, and Walsh-Kaczmarek Absent and Excused: Commissioner Rundle Also Present: Planning Associate Heidi Heller ______________________________________________________________________________ Index to Minutes Page Review Code Amendment – Accessory buildings 2 Review Code Amendment – Day care centers in public and semi-public buildings 3 _____________________________________________________________________________ 3. Approval of Minutes July 1, 2009 MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Miller/Commissioner Lang. To approve the minutes of the July 1, 2009 regular Planning Commission meeting as slightly amended. Ayes – 6 Nays – 0 Motion carried. _____________________________________________________________________________ Mounds View Planning Commission August 19, 2009 Regular Meeting Page 2 ____________________________________________________________________________ 4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda None. ______________________________________________________________________________ 5. Planning Cases None. ______________________________________________________________________________ 6. Other Planning Activity A. Review Code Amendment - Accessory Building Planning Associate Heller stated staff has been working on language for the accessory building code amendment. She indicated the proposed language now has the maximum height at 18 feet. She indicated that the City Council had concerns regarding the proposed 20-foot garage height language, and staff has added additional language in Section 5 that states the structure should match or be similar to the character and style of the roof of the principal structure and have a pitch of at least 2-12. She added there is additional language in Section 4 to specify materials that are not allowed on the exterior of an accessory building. Chair Stevenson questioned the additional language in Section 5 and the implication that accessory buildings less than 250 square feet can have a flat roof. He felt this wasn’t the appropriate section to have the 250 square foot limitation. He added that he had concerns regarding the pitch specification and the problems with flat roofs in the Minnesota winter climate. He suggested moving this specification to a different section of the code. Planning Associate Heller suggested moving the language regarding the pitch of the roof into Section 3. Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek questioned language in Section 4g regarding canvas and why it is repeated in materials not allowed, and then would be allowed for green houses. Commissioner Cramblit stated the intent of the green house specification is that other materials are typically used for them. Planning Associate Heller suggested removing the word “on” in the sentence “except for on green houses.” Chair Stevenson stated that by removing the reference to green houses, it implies the city doesn’t allow them. In building a green house, you typically use other materials. Mounds View Planning Commission August 19, 2009 Regular Meeting Page 3 ____________________________________________________________________________ Commissioner Lang stated the purpose of the section is to not allow those specific things, and then at the end, the exception of the greenhouse is tagged on. He added this section made sense to him. Chair Stevenson stated the exception for green houses was originally put in to the code to eliminate the building of these temporary carports. Commissioner Miller questioned subdivision 12 and that it goes right into building height. Planning Associate Heller stated this is referring to all buildings and how the height is measured. MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Miller/Commissioner Cramblit. Resolution 909-09 An ordinance amending Chapters 1102, 1104 and 1006 of the Mounds View Zoning Code about the Definition of Building Height and About Various Code Provisions about Accessory Buildings including Height, Required Accessory Building Separation Distance, Materials and Exterior Design as amended. Ayes – 6 Nays – 0 Motion carried. B. Review Code Amendment – Day care centers in public and semi-public buildings Planning Associate Heller stated that when the Planning Commission originally amended the city code to allow day care centers as a conditional use in the public and semi-public buildings such as churches, we didn’t take into account that churches already require a conditional use permit to be in an R-1 zoning district. When this was presented to the City Council, they felt the daycare center shouldn’t have to get a conditional use permit when the building use already had one, so staff changed the language to address this. She added staff felt that it would probably not be a problem if an adult daycare program operated in one of these public buildings also, so staff added adult daycare to the zoning code definitions and included it as an allowed accessory use. Commissioner Miller questioned the minimum lot size stated in the city code. Planning Associate Heller stated all language in black is the current language and when the primary building use was going through the conditional use process, the requirements are addressed at that time. Many of the requirements for daycare centers are similar to the public or semi-public building requirements, such as lot size, setbacks, parking, traffic flow and accessibility. Commissioner Miller questioned the adult day care language and wondered if there couldn’t be care for adults in their own home. Planning Associate Heller indicated the new adult day care language does not apply to that because home care is a smaller scale operation that the city does not regulate. Mounds View Planning Commission August 19, 2009 Regular Meeting Page 4 ____________________________________________________________________________ MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek/Commissioner Lang. Resolution 910- 09; Resolution recommending approval of amendments to Chapters 1102 and 1106 of the Mounds View Zoning Code to Allow Daycare Centers as a Conditional Use in R-1 districts in public or semi-public recreational buildings and neighborhood or community centers, public and private educational institutional limited to elementary, junior high and senior high schools and religious institutions, such as churches, temples and synagogues. Ayes – 6 Nays – 0 Motion carried. ______________________________________________________________________________ 7. Next Planning Commission Meeting: A. September 2, 2009 B. September 16, 2009 ______________________________________________________________________________ 8. Adjournment to Agenda Session There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the meeting at 7:30 p.m. ______________________________________________________________________________ (The meeting immediately adjourned to the Agenda Session) Respectfully submitted, Ken Roberts Community Development Director Transcribed by: Barbara Suciu TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. Item No: 2 Meeting Date: October 5, 2009 Type of Business: WS Administrator Review: ____ City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Heidi Steinmetz, Economic Development Specialist Item Title/Subject: Discuss Burger Time Restaurant Concept for Former Premium Stop Site Introduction The attached staff report to the EDC dated September 18, 2009, provides background on Burger Time and how their building concept may fit with the 1.28-acre, EDA-owned property located at 2390 County Highway 10. The Mounds View Economic Development Commission (EDC) made the following two recommendations (6-0 vote, 1 member absent) to the EDA on September 18, 2009 in relation to Burger Time and the property at 2390 County Highway 10: 1. The EDA should proceed in discussions with Burger Time or other parties interested in purchasing the former Premium Stop parcel located at 2390 County Highway 10. 2. The EDA should set an asking price for the former Premium Stop parcel located at 2390 County Highway 10 based on the mid-point of value ranges that at least three appraisers provide verbally to City staff at no charge. Background – 2390 County Road 10 In mid-to-late 2006, the EDA invested $652,000 in the below pictured former Premium Stop parcel located at 2390 County Highway 10. Cty Rd H2 County Hwy 10 Greenfield Ave. 2390 Cty Hwy 10 Taiko Japanese Restaurant Oct. 5, 2009 City Council Work Session Item 2 – Burger Time Page 2 of 3 Listed below is a breakdown of the EDA’s investment in the property at 2390 County Highway 10: $2,000 appraisal $625,000 purchase/acquisition of the property $25,000 building demolition, site clearance/environmental abatement Discussion There are two discussion points for the EDA/City Council to consider: 1. Is the EDA/City Council interested in the Burger Time concept for 2390 County Highway 10? 2. Does the EDA/City Council want to set an asking price for the property? Below are a few items for the EDA/City Council to consider when discussing Burger Time and 2390 County Highway 10: 2010 Ramsey County Estimated Property Value Ramsey County’s estimated market value of 2390 County Highway 10 is $446,000, which is just under $8.00 per square foot. The current value of the property is determined by its current use, which is a vacant commercial lot. Per the EDC’s direction on September 18, 2009, City staff contacted several appraisers. City staff learned that since appraisers are certified with the State, even an estimated value range is considered an appraisal, so appraisers will not provide value ranges at no charge. Plus, even the most basic appraisal would take several hours. Therefore, two appraisal firms suggested contacting a commercial real estate broker or realtor if the EDA is interested in requested a range of value for the property at no charge. Property Tax Scenarios Since the EDA currently owns the parcel, there are no property taxes generated from the property. If a private party purchased the vacant parcel, the total property taxes paid (City, State, School District) would be about $13,462. From 2007-2009, the property would have generated at total of about $40,386 in property taxes if the property was privately owned. Forecasted Tax Contribution by Burger Time The local commercial real estate broker for Burger Time estimated that a new Burger Time building would be valued between $750,000 and $900,000. Based on a building value of $750,000 alone, the amount of total taxes paid on the property would be about $23,428 per year. Zoning The 2390 County Highway 10 parcel is zoned B-3 (Highway Business). TheB-3 zoning designation allows a restaurant, but Burger Time would need to apply for a Conditional Use Permit because it is a drive-in/convenience restaurant, along with a Development Review, for consideration by the Planning Commission and the City Council. Oct. 5, 2009 City Council Work Session Item 2 – Burger Time Page 3 of 3 Recommendation Staff recommends that the EDA/City Council provide direction to City staff on the following: 1. Whether to proceed with discussions with Burger Time for the possible purchase of the EDA-owned property at 2390 County Highway 10. 2. Whether the EDA would like to set an asking price for 2390 County Highway 10. Respectfully submitted, ___________________________ Heidi Steinmetz, Economic Development Specialist Attachment 1. Staff Report to EDC, September 18, 2009 Item No: 6A Meeting Date: October 7, 2009 Type of Business: Other Planning Activity City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Mounds View Planning Commission From: Ken Roberts, Community Development Director Item Title/Subject: Discuss possible development project at the Premium Stop site, 2390 County Highway 10 Introduction: Community Development staff saw an article in the newspaper about the restaurant “Burger Time” and that it was planning to expand in the Twin Cities metro area. The site requirements for this restaurant could fit onto the small vacant Premium Stop site that the City owns. Discussion: Heidi Steinmetz, Economic Development Specialist, has talked with the EDC (Economic Development Commission) about this proposal, and will be talking to the City Council at the October 5, 2009 Worksession. Staff also wanted to discuss the idea with the Planning Commission. The EDC and Worksession staff reports are attached for your review. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission discuss the possible redevelopment of the Premium Stop site to a Burger Time restaurant. Respectfully submitted, Ken Roberts – Community Development Director Attachments: 1. Council Worksession staff report 2. EDC staff report Aerial View of 2390 County Highway 10 Item No: 2 Meeting Date: October 5, 2009 Type of Business: WS Administrator Review: ____ City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Heidi Steinmetz, Economic Development Specialist Item Title/Subject: Discuss Burger Time Restaurant Concept for Former Premium Stop Site Introduction The attached staff report to the EDC dated September 18, 2009, provides background on Burger Time and how their building concept may fit with the 1.28-acre, EDA-owned property located at 2390 County Highway 10. The Mounds View Economic Development Commission (EDC) made the following two recommendations (6-0 vote, 1 member absent) to the EDA on September 18, 2009 in relation to Burger Time and the property at 2390 County Highway 10: 1. The EDA should proceed in discussions with Burger Time or other parties interested in purchasing the former Premium Stop parcel located at 2390 County Highway 10. 2. The EDA should set an asking price for the former Premium Stop parcel located at 2390 County Highway 10 based on the mid-point of value ranges that at least three appraisers provide verbally to City staff at no charge. Background – 2390 County Road 10 In mid-to-late 2006, the EDA invested $652,000 in the below pictured former Premium Stop parcel located at 2390 County Highway 10. Cty Rd H2 County Hwy 10 Greenfield Ave. 2390 Cty Hwy 10 Taiko Japanese Restaurant Oct. 5, 2009 City Council Work Session Item 2 – Burger Time Page 2 of 3 Listed below is a breakdown of the EDA’s investment in the property at 2390 County Highway 10: $2,000 appraisal $625,000 purchase/acquisition of the property $25,000 building demolition, site clearance/environmental abatement Discussion There are two discussion points for the EDA/City Council to consider: 1. Is the EDA/City Council interested in the Burger Time concept for 2390 County Highway 10? 2. Does the EDA/City Council want to set an asking price for the property? Below are a few items for the EDA/City Council to consider when discussing Burger Time and 2390 County Highway 10: 2010 Ramsey County Estimated Property Value Ramsey County’s estimated market value of 2390 County Highway 10 is $446,000, which is just under $8.00 per square foot. The current value of the property is determined by its current use, which is a vacant commercial lot. Per the EDC’s direction on September 18, 2009, City staff contacted several appraisers. City staff learned that since appraisers are certified with the State, even an estimated value range is considered an appraisal, so appraisers will not provide value ranges at no charge. Plus, even the most basic appraisal would take several hours. Therefore, two appraisal firms suggested contacting a commercial real estate broker or realtor if the EDA is interested in requested a range of value for the property at no charge. Property Tax Scenarios Since the EDA currently owns the parcel, there are no property taxes generated from the property. If a private party purchased the vacant parcel, the total property taxes paid (City, State, School District) would be about $13,462. From 2007-2009, the property would have generated at total of about $40,386 in property taxes if the property was privately owned. Forecasted Tax Contribution by Burger Time The local commercial real estate broker for Burger Time estimated that a new Burger Time building would be valued between $750,000 and $900,000. Based on a building value of $750,000 alone, the amount of total taxes paid on the property would be about $23,428 per year. Zoning The 2390 County Highway 10 parcel is zoned B-3 (Highway Business). TheB-3 zoning designation allows a restaurant, but Burger Time would need to apply for a Conditional Use Permit because it is a drive-in/convenience restaurant, along with a Development Review, for consideration by the Planning Commission and the City Council. Oct. 5, 2009 City Council Work Session Item 2 – Burger Time Page 3 of 3 Recommendation Staff recommends that the EDA/City Council provide direction to City staff on the following: 1. Whether to proceed with discussions with Burger Time for the possible purchase of the EDA-owned property at 2390 County Highway 10. 2. Whether the EDA would like to set an asking price for 2390 County Highway 10. Respectfully submitted, ___________________________ Heidi Steinmetz, Economic Development Specialist Attachment 1. Staff Report to EDC, September 18, 2009 Item No: 6B Meeting Date: October 7, 2009 Type of Business: Other Planning Activity City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Mounds View Planning Commission From: Ken Roberts, Community Development Director Item Title/Subject: Review Code Amendment – Voting Requirements for Zoning Amendments Introduction: Community Development staff has a list of code amendments that the City should make. This report is about a proposed code amendment about the voting requirements for zoning amendments. Discussion: The City Attorney has advised staff that the City should amend Section 1125.01, Subd.1j of the City Code. (Please see the attached memo from 2004). This change is necessary because the current City Code language is inconsistent with State statutes. The City may not adopt code language that is more restrictive than or inconsistent with State statute. The current code language reads as follows: j. Four-Fifths Vote: Amendments of this Title, the Official Zoning map or for a conditional use permit shall require passage by four-fifths (4/5) vote of the full City Council. Simply put, this means that the City Code now requires at least four of the City Council members to vote in approval of any zoning change in the City. Unfortunately, State statutes (462.357, Subd. 2(b)) requires a simply majority vote (3/5) of the City Council to approve most zoning changes. However, the state statute does require the City Council to approve a zoning amendment that changes all or part of an existing residential zoning district to either commercial or industrial by a four-fifths (4/5) vote. Staff has prepared an amendment to the City Code to correct this conflict. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission review and discuss Resolution 911-09. Code Amendment Report Voting Requirements Page 2 Respectfully submitted, Ken Roberts – Community Development Director Attachments: 1. April 27, 2004 memo from Scott Riggs 2. Resolution 911-09 MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 911-09 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 1125 OF THE MOUNDS VIEW ZONING CODE ABOUT THE VOTING REQUIREMENTS FOR ZONING CHANGES WHEREAS, based on the recommendation of the City Attorney, City staff has recommended that the City change Section 1125.01, Subd. 1j. of the City Code about the voting requirements for zoning changes in Mounds View and, WHEREAS, City staff has amended Chapter 1125.01, Subd. 1j of the Mounds View Zoning Code by deleting the stricken language and adding the underlined text as follows: 1125.01 (1)(j): Four-Fifths Vote: Amendments of this Title, or to the Official Zoning Map that change all or part an existing residential zoning district to either commercial or industrial or for a conditional use permit shall require passage by a four-fifths (4/5) vote of the full City Council. All other amendments to this Title, to the Official Zoning Map or for a conditional use permit shall require passage by a three-fifths vote of the full City Council. WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission concurs that an amendment to the City Code is warranted and justified. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends approval of the proposed amendment to Chapter 1125.01 of the Mounds View Zoning Code clarify the voting requirements for zoning changes. BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission directs staff to forward this resolution to the City Council before approval of the minutes. Adopted this 7th day of October, 2009. _________________________________________ Gary Stevenson, Chairperson ATTEST: _________________________________________ Kenneth Roberts, Community Development Director (SEAL) Item No: 6C Meeting Date: October 7, 2009 Type of Business: Other Planning Activity City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Mounds View Planning Commission From: Ken Roberts, Community Development Director Item Title/Subject: Review Code Amendment – Penalties Introduction: Community Development staff has a list of code amendments that the City should make. This report is about a proposed code amendment about the penalties for certain code violations. Discussion: Chapter 1125 is the Administration and Enforcement part of Title 1100 (Zoning Code) of the City Code. The prosecuting City Attorney (Tom Hughes) has advised Jeremiah Anderson that the City should amend Section 1125.06 of the Code. (Please see the attached e-mail from 2008). The attorney told City staff that this change is necessary because the current City Code language about penalties is not as clear or as strong as it should be. The current code language reads as follows: 1125.06 PENALTIES: Any person who violates any provision of the Code shall, upon conviction thereof, be fined as provided in Section 104.01 of the Code. Each day a violation is permitted to exist shall constitute a separate offense. Staff has prepared an amendment to the City Code to make Section 1125.06 about penalties clearer, stronger and more consistent with other penalty sections of the City Code. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission review and discuss Resolution 912-09. Respectfully submitted, Ken Roberts – Community Development Director Attachments: 1. April 22, 2008 e-mail from Jeremiah Anderson 2. Resolution 912-09 MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 912-09 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO SECTION 1125.06 OF THE MOUNDS VIEW ZONING CODE ABOUT PENALTIES WHEREAS, based on the recommendation of the City Attorney, City staff has recommended that the City change Section 1125.06 of the City Code about penalties and, WHEREAS, City staff has amended Chapter 1125.06 of the Mounds View Zoning Code by deleting the stricken language and adding the underlined text as follows: 1125.06 VIOLATION AND PENALTIES: Any person who violates any provision of the Code is guilty of a misdemeanor and shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished and fined as provided in Section 104.01 of the Code. Each day a violation is permitted to exist shall constitute a separate offense. WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission concurs that an amendment to the City Code is warranted and justified. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends approval of the proposed amendment to Chapter 1125.01 of the Mounds View Zoning Code clarify the voting requirements for zoning changes. BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission directs staff to forward this resolution to the City Council before approval of the minutes. Adopted this 7th day of October, 2009. _________________________________________ Gary Stevenson, Chairperson ATTEST: _________________________________________ Kenneth Roberts, Community Development Director (SEAL)