Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-01-2008 MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AGENDA October 1, 2008 -- 7:00 P.M. 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Minutes: A. August 20, 2008 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 A. MA2008-001 Consider a Revised Preliminary Plat for the Mermaid Applicant: Charlie & Dan Hall Address: 2200 County Highway 10 6. Other Planning Activity A. 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update 7. Next Planning Commission Meetings: A. October 15, 2008 B. November 5, 2008 8. Adjourn to Agenda Session Agenda Session 1. Review Minutes: a. September 3, 2008 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 September 3, 2008 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. September 3, 2008. ______________________________________________________________________________ 2. Roll Call Members Present: Chair Stevenson; Commissioners Cramblit, Gunn, Lang, Meehlhause, and Miller Absent and Excused: Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek Also Present: Community Development Director Roberts and Planning Associate Heller ______________________________________________________________________________ Index to Minutes Page MA2008-001 and PA2008-001Consideration of a Major Subdivision and Amendment to the Mermaid Planned Unit Development (PUD) to Allow for Retail Uses 2 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update 4 _____________________________________________________________________________ 3. Approval of Minutes August 6, 2008 MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Gunn/Commissioner Miller. To approve the Minutes of the August 6, 2008 regular Planning Commission meeting as slightly amended. Ayes – 6 Nays – 0 Motion carried. _____________________________________________________________________________ Mounds View Planning Commission September 3, 2008 Regular Meeting Page 2 ________________________________________________________________________ 4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda None. ______________________________________________________________________________ 5. Planning Cases A. MA2008-001 and PA2008-001 Consideration of a Major Subdivision and Amendment to the “Mermaid” Planned Unit Development (PUD) to Allow for Retail Uses Planning Associate Heller reported the applicants, Charlie and Dan Hall, have applied for a major subdivision to divide off a 1.4 acre parcel from their existing 9.36 acre site for retail use. After the subdivision, the applicant plans to sell this parcel to a developer to build a new retail center. They have also requested an amendment to their current Planned Unit Development (PUD) Agreement to allow retail uses on their site. The current PUD only allows for bowling lanes, hotel, banquet center, night club and lounge and restaurant uses. Planning Associate Heller stated she would first address the major subdivision. She stated the 1998 Comprehensive Plan designated this corner as Regional Commercial PUD and this is not proposed to change in the 2008 comprehensive plan update. The proposed subdivision would be consistent with this designation and is consistent with the goals and policies as specified in the Land Use section of the Comprehensive Plan. Planning Associate Heller indicated the regional storm water pond that was constructed along County Road H handles all the storm water runoff for the Mermaid, along with several others nearby properties. She stated since no additional impervious surface would be added, the current system for drainage should be adequate. Also, when the development review for the new retail center is applied for, the applicant will be required to make application with Rice Creek Watershed District for approval. Planning Associate Heller stated the property has the required perimeter easements around the current Mermaid property already and staff does not believe that adding additional easements along the two new property lines running through the parking lot would be necessary. Planning Associate Heller stated there are no new streets or access drives into the Mermaid site being proposed. She stated with the five new proposed retail sites, the current accesses to the Mermaid by County Highway 10 and County Road H are adequate to handle the additional traffic. She stated with a subdivision of land, city code states the applicant will be subject to a park dedication fee and this would be determined by City Council. Planning Associate Heller stated that when a new building is constructed, all utilities on the site would need to be located underground and the City Forester would review the new landscaping plan at the time of submittal. Also, there are no wetlands on the site. Planning Associate Heller stated the Mermaid was rezoned in 2000 to PUD. Since 2000, the operations of the Mermaid have slightly changed with the night club being removed, more banquet Mounds View Planning Commission September 3, 2008 Regular Meeting Page 3 ________________________________________________________________________ facilities and the addition of an arcade. The main issue with these planning requests is parking and would there be enough. She stated the developer submitted a parking study for the site and this information was included in the Planning Commissioners’ packet. She stated the 2000 PUD Agreement required 808 parking stalls and currently the Mermaid only has 760 parking stalls. She stated staff felt the new retail would have somewhat different hours of business compared to the Mermaid so the proposed shared parking should not be an issue. Chair Stevenson stated the parking requirements are an issue but it should not determine if the PUD would be approved and would be reviewed in the development process. Planning Associate Heller indicated the parking study and discussed the sharing of parking between the uses, but there would still be a loss of 106 parking stalls. She added parking requirements are based solely on the square footage of the buildings and doesn’t take into account the overlapping of uses or different business needs and hours on the site. Commissioner Miller stated she was concerned about traffic off of County Highway 10. Planning Associate Heller felt the current accesses to the Mermaid would be adequate. She indicated the County Highway 10 and County Road H intersection is anticipated to be rebuilt within the next year or two. Commissioner Cramblit asked if it was part of the TCAAP restructure. Planning Associate Heller stated she believed so and had heard that it could happen as early as 2009. Community Development Director Roberts stated he anticipates the parking issue would work itself out because it is in the best interest of the business owners to make it work. If suddenly there isn’t enough parking it would over flow into adjoining businesses. He felt the retail center would not need more than 40 to 50 parking spaces at one time and the zoning code can not address all of the different business and parking scenarios. Chair Stevenson indicated parking needs may depend on which types of businesses come into the retail area. He added he was impressed with the parking study that was performed and the results. Commissioner Meehlhause stated the Mermaid’s parking lots always seem like they are not being used as much as they could be. He also expressed concern about where the park and ride would be relocated. Dan Hall, owner of the Mermaid, stated the park and ride can go anywhere on the site. Currently, it has 40 to 50 cars and uses a portion of the proposed development area. He stated there is also the cross parking agreement with Abbey Carpet. He stated he has researched many other area establishments similar to the Mermaid and their parking amounts is considerably less than what they have. Mounds View Planning Commission September 3, 2008 Regular Meeting Page 4 ________________________________________________________________________ Planning Associate Heller indicated the parking study numbers included the tent that is on the property during the summer months and added the tent is not taking away any parking stalls nor did the City require any additional parking to provide on the site when the Interim Use Permit for the tent was approved. MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Gunn /Commissioner Meehlhause. To approve Resolution 894-08, a Resolution Recommending Approval of a Preliminary Plat and an Amendment to the Mermaid PUD Agreement to Allow “Retail” at 2200 County Highway 10 as amended. Ayes –6 Nays – 0 Motion carried. ______________________________________________________________________________ 6. Other Planning Activity A. 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update Community Development Director Roberts stated at the last meeting the Planning Commission chose to compare the four new chapters that were presented to the current chapters of the Comprehensive Plan and asked for any comments or feedback. In addition, there are two more chapters for review. Chair Stevenson instructed staff to keep re-writing the Comprehensive Plan. He found it much easier to read. He added he was impressed with the 2007 and 2008 current data. Community Development Director Roberts stated the figure and page numbers for the tables and charts will be updated at the end once all the chapters are put together. Also, two chapters, public facilities and transportation, have been sent to the City’s engineer consultant to work on. Chair Stevenson indicated he would like the Planning Commission to have color copies of the updated Land Use map that is in the report. He asked how often staff is meeting with the Comp Plan Task Force. Community Development Director Roberts stated that he has not met with the task force since he started at Mounds View. Then asked the Planning Commissioners their opinion on meeting with the Comp Plan Task Force. Chair Stevenson stated he would like if the Task Force were involved in the final review. Planning Associate Heller stated the document is almost complete and didn’t know if it would be too much for the Task Force to review the document as a whole. Commissioner Gunn asked if there was time for the Task Force to review. Mounds View Planning Commission September 3, 2008 Regular Meeting Page 5 ________________________________________________________________________ Chair Stevenson stated he would like the rest of the Task Force to be on board with the revised Comprehensive Plan. He indicated Task Force members should review the revised plan so they have the opportunity to make comments. Community Development Director Roberts asked if the Task Force should come to a Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Meehlhause suggested giving the Task Force three to four weeks to review the plan and then letting the task force have an opportunity to submit any final comments. He added if there are minimal comments regarding the final plan there wouldn’t be a need for the Task Force to come back to a Planning Commission meeting. Planning Associate Heller stated she could contact the Task Force members to see if they are interested in reviewing the plan. Also, she would let the members know that the Planning Commission has reviewed the document. Commissioner Lang suggested giving the Task Force a last chance for giving suggestions or comments. Community Development Director Roberts asked the Commission if there any elements that they felt were missing in the Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Miller asked if the City Council has the opportunity to add or eliminate information. Community Development Director Roberts stated the City Council could review the document intensely or they may decide to simply approve it as is since the Planning Commission and the Comprehensive Plan Task Force have reviewed it. Commissioner Gunn stated the new document is more relevant to the city now. Community Development Director Roberts stated there are three elements remaining: Economic Development, Public Facilities and Transportation. He stated the six elements that the Planning Commission has received are the most relevant to the Planning Commission. He stated the economic development portion should be coming shortly. Chair Stevenson stated the most important item is the Future Land Use Map and he felt the Planning Commission needs to spend time reviewing this map. Planning Associate Heller stated there have been changes to the Future Land Use map from the last meeting. Community Development Director Roberts encouraged the Planning Commission to give staff comments on the plan anytime. ___________________________________________________________________________ Mounds View Planning Commission September 3, 2008 Regular Meeting Page 6 ________________________________________________________________________ 7. Next Planning Commission Meeting: A. September 17, 2008 B. October 1, 2008 ______________________________________________________________________________ 8. Adjournment to Agenda Session There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the meeting at 8:05 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: 5A Meeting Date: October 1, 2008 Type of Business: Action City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Mounds View Planning Commission From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate Item Title/Subject: Consideration of a Revised Preliminary Plat for the Mermaid; Planning Case MA2008-001 Introduction: Charlie and Dan Hall, owners and representatives of The Mermaid, applied to the City for a major subdivision to create a new 1.4 acre parcel from their existing 9.36 acre site. They also have requested an amendment to the Mermaid property Planned Unit Development (PUD). On September 3, 2008, the Planning Commission recommended approval of both the preliminary plat and the PUD Amendment, and the requests were scheduled for City Council action on September 22, 2008. Due to a last minute submission of a revised preliminary plat, the City Council tabled the requests on September 22, 2008 in order for the revised plat to be reviewed by staff and the Planning Commission. The revised plat now shows three lots instead of two. The owners of the Mermaid wish to add a third lot in order to create separate lots for the Mermaid Entertainment Center and the AmericInn Hotel, along with the same 1.4 acre parcel for retail. Since this new plat is a substantial change from the previous plat that the Commission took action on, staff and the City Attorney want the Planning Commission to review and take action on the revised plat. Discussion: Comprehensive Plan: The 1998 Comprehensive Plan Existing Land Use Map shows the County Highway 10 and County Road H corner as four parcels, thus was the case until 2000 when the Mermaid purchased the Rent-All building and the four existing parcels were replatted for the hotel addition and rezoned to a PUD. The 1998 Future Land Use map designates the entire Mermaid corner as Regional Commercial PUD, and this has not been changed in the 2008 Comprehensive Plan update. The proposed subdivision would be consistent with that designation and consistent with the goals and policies as articulated in the Land Use section of the Comprehensive Plan. Drainage Plan: In 2002, a new regional stormwater pond was constructed along County Road H, at the southeast corner of the Edgewood Middle School property that would treat the stormwater runoff for the Mermaid, along with several other nearby properties and the completed County Road H reconstruction. It can be assumed that little additional stormwater treatment would be required by Rice Creek Watershed District for this subdivision or when a new building is constructed since no additional impervious surface would be added. Although when a development review for the new retail center is applied for, the applicant will be required to contact Rice Creek Watershed District. Mermaid Staff Report October 1, 2008 Page 2 Easements: The City’s Subdivision Code requires that plats dedicate perimeter drainage and utility easements for each lot in the subdivision. This plat already has the required perimeter easements around the current Mermaid property, and staff does not believe that adding additional easements along the new property lines running through the parking lot are necessary. Streets: No new or altered streets or access drives into the Mermaid site are being proposed. Park Dedication Requirements: The Subdivision Code indicates that any subdivision of land is subject to a park dedication fee. In this case, the City typically sets the fee as equal to 10% of the market value of the land. Staff uses Ramsey County assessed values as the basis for dedication computation. In 2000 when the PUD was approved, a park dedication fee was paid. Staff recommends that the fee only be based on the difference in the land value between 2000 and 2008, and only on the retail lot. This fee amount should be determined by the City Council. Major Subdivision Summary: The Mermaid is currently zoned PUD, Planned Unit Development, and the proposed 3-lot subdivision would be consistent with the existing zoning of the property. One of the proposed property lines would separate the Mermaid from the hotel. The building code may require additional firewall construction between the structures to have each building on it’s own lot. The submitted revised plat appears to meet city and building code requirements and is now being reviewed by the city attorney and building official/fire marshall. Deadline for Action: The original application was accepted by the City on August 25, 2008 and in accordance with MN Statute 15.99, a decision shall be made within 60 days of application acceptance. The deadline for action for this request is December 23, 2008, since the City exercised its option to extend the timeline for an additional 60 days. Alternatives: The Planning Commission should review the plans and discuss the revised preliminary plat. The Planning Commission may take one of the following actions related to the Preliminary Plat request: 1. Approve the revised Preliminary Plat as requested. 2. Deny the request. To consider this option, the Commission will need to direct staff to prepare a resolution with findings of fact to support the denial recommendation. 3. Table action on the request. This option would be appropriate if the Planning Commission should need additional information or more input before a decision can be made. Mermaid Staff Report October 1, 2008 Page 3 Recommendation: Approve the revised Preliminary Plat as requested. Resolution 895-08 is attached for your consideration if you should choose this option. Respectfully submitted, Heidi Heller Planning Associate Attachments: 1. Zoning Map 2. Aerial View 3. Concept Plan 4. Resolution 895-08 5. Preliminary Plat date stamped 9-25-08 Zoning Map Mermaid *Properties not indicated with a designation are zoned R-1, Single Family Residential Aerial View N Highway 10 County Road H Mermaid Hotel Concept Plan for Retail Mall MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 895-08 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A REVISED PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR THE MERMAID, 2200 COUNTY HIGHWAY 10; MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE MA2008-001 WHEREAS, Charlie and Dan Hall, representing the Mermaid, have requested approval of a revised preliminary plat for a major subdivision at 2200 County Highway 10, legally-described as follows: Units 1 and 2 and adjacent common element in Common Interest Community Plat of Common Interest Community Number 598, Mermaid Hotel and Entertainment Center Condominium, described as follows: That part of Lot 1, Block 1, MERMAID ADDITION, lying southerly and easterly of a line described as follows: Commencing at the most easterly corner of said Lot 1, thence North 34 degrees 38 minutes 17 seconds West, along the northeasterly line of said Lot 1, at a distance of 280.00 feet to the point of beginning; thence South 55 degrees 24 minutes 00 seconds West a distance of 123.00 feet; thence South 2 degrees 13 minutes 00 seconds East a distance of 345.80 feet to the southeasterly line of said Lot 1 and there terminating. WHEREAS, The above-described land is zoned PUD, Planned Unit Development and is designated as Regional Commercial on the Comprehensive Plan; and, WHEREAS, Charlie and Dan Hall have submitted a revised Preliminary Plat for a major subdivision that combines the two existing lots and creates three new lots; and, WHEREAS, the community development staff have reviewed the preliminary plat and finds that it satisfies the minimum subdivision requirements as articulated in Titles 1100 and 1200 of the Mounds View Municipal Code; and, WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 1204.04, Subd. 4, the subdivision is subject to a park dedication fee which the amount will be determined by the City Council; and, WHEREAS, the proposed subdivision is not within a designated wetland area; and, WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents regarding these requests 1. Staff Report 2. Preliminary Plat date stamped September 25, 2008 3. Zoning Map 4. Aerial View Resolution 895-08 Page 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat date stamped September 25, 2008 submitted by Charlie and Dan Hall, representing the Mermaid subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall arrange to have an acceptable Title Commitment provided to the City Attorney for review prior to the final approval of the subdivision by the City Council. 2. The applicant shall satisfy any additional requirements made by the City Attorney in a plat opinion. 3. The applicant shall satisfy all the requirements of the City Building Official/Fire Marshall. 4. The applicant shall pay a park dedication fee in an amount to be determined by the City Council. 5. The applicant shall apply for Final Plat approval no later than 6 months after the date of City Council approval of the Preliminary Plat, or the Preliminary Plat approval will become null and void. BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission directs staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes. Adopted this 1st day of October, 2008. _____________________________________ Gary Stevenson, Chairperson ATTEST: _____________________________________ Kenneth Roberts Community Development Director (SEAL)