Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-21-2007 MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AGENDA March 21, 2007 -- 7:00 P.M. 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Minutes: A. January 24, 2007 4. Citizens Requests and Comments Relating to Planning and Zoning Issues Not Already Present on the Agenda. (Before speaking, please give your full name and address for the minutes.) 5. Planning Cases A. MA2007-001: Consideration of a Major Subdivision for 8360 Long Lake Road Applicant: Charlene Moschkau Address: 15456 Fillmore St. NW, Elk River, MN 55330 6. Other Planning Activity A. Proposed Amendment to Mounds View Zoning Code Chapters 1102 and 1113: Pertaining to a “Neighborhood Motor Fuel Station” 7. Next Planning Commission Meetings: A. April 4, 2007 B. April 18, 2007 8. Adjourn to Agenda Session Agenda Session 1. Review Minutes: a. March 7, 2007 2. Staff Reports a. Upcoming Planning Cases 3. Chairperson and Planning Commissioners’ Reports 4. Meeting Conclusion DRAFT PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting March 7, 2007 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. March 7, 2007 ______________________________________________________________________________ 2. Roll Call Members Present: Chair Stevenson, Commissioners Cramblit, Gunn, Meehlhause, Miller, and Walsh-Kaczmarek Absent and Excused: Commissioner Lang Also Present: Community Development Director Ericson, Planning Associate Heller ______________________________________________________________________________ Index to Minutes Page Planning Cases MI2007-001; ZC2007-002; CU2007-002; CP2007-001: 2 Consideration of a Minor Subdivision, Rezoning, Conditional Use Permit and Comp Plan Amendment. Applicant: Moundsview Fina: Leon Theis & Tom Manke – “The Station” Address: 2280 County Road I. ______________________________________________________________________________ 3. Approve Minutes A. January 10, 2007 MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Cramblit/ Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek to approve the Minutes of the January 10, 2007 regular Planning Commission meeting as slightly amended. Ayes – 6 Nays – 0 Motion carried. ______________________________________________________________________________ Mounds View Planning Commission March 7, 2007 Regular Meeting Page 2 ________________________________________________________________________ 4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda None. ______________________________________________________________________________ 5. Planning Case MI2007-001; ZC2007-002; CU2007-002; CP2007-001: Consideration of a Minor Subdivision, Rezoning, Conditional Use Permit and Comp Plan Amendment. Applicant: Mounds View Fina: Leon Theis & Tom Manke – “The Station” Address: 2280 County Road I. Planning Associate Heller stated The Station at 2280 County Road I has been there for nearly 50 years and exists as a legal nonconforming use. She indicated the property owners would like to add two additional fuel pumps to the site and expand the current canopy to cover both sets of pumps. She explained the owners must bring the property into compliance in order to make the changes. Planning Associate Heller explained the four planning actions before the Commission. She stated one is a minor subdivision, however, the lot size is only 9500 square feet, and 22,500 square feet, with lot dimensions of 130’ x 150’ feet, is required for a gas station. She commented the owners have entered into a purchase agreement with the property owners directly to the south. The property would almost double in depth, and the size would increase from .22 acres to .56 acres, bringing them over the minimum lot requirements for a gas station. Planning Associate Heller stated the minor subdivision would be a lot split and a combination. She pointed out five small parcels currently make up the station and adjoining properties. She explained these would be turned it into two parcels. Planning Associate Heller stated The Station is currently located in a B-2 zoning district with a land use designation of Neighborhood Commercial. She explained in order for the gas station to become conforming, the property must be rezoned to a B-3 and get a Conditional Use Permit. She pointed out a Comprehensive Plan amendment is also required for a land use designation change to Highway Commercial. Planning Associate Heller stated this case is unique in that all four elements must work together for each request to be applicable. She explained The Station was built in 1959 as a gas station and has existed as such since that time. She explained The Station originally had four pumps, however, two were removed when the canopy was built several years ago. Planning Associate Heller explained the new property line jogs around a garage currently being used by the Alano Society. She stated that in order to have the five-foot setback for an accessory building, the property line must jog around the garage. Planning Associate Heller stated park dedication fees are required for a subdivision. She explained, in this case, the subdivision would not result in any additional dwelling units, Mounds View Planning Commission March 7, 2007 Regular Meeting Page 3 ________________________________________________________________________ although the usage would intensify somewhat with the two additional fuel pumps. She informed the Commission it could decide if fees should be required. Planning Associate Heller reported the Certificate of Survey and Title Commitment have been sent to the City Attorney’s office for review. She stated the City’s Public Works Department has also reviewed the site plans and did not have any issues with the proposal. She said Public Works indicated any driveway access changes could be made when the street reconstruction project happened in the area. She stated the site plans have also been sent to the Ramsey County Public Works because The Station is located on a County road. She indicated concerns are not expected as no driveway changes would be made. Planning Associate Heller stated the task is to rezone the location from a B-2 to a B-3. She explained according to City Code, in order to approve a rezoning request it must be determined if the requested zoning designation would be consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan and not detrimental to the neighborhood or adversely affect any adjoining properties. She explained The Station has been in place for nearly 50 years and the use would not change. She stated the two additional gas pumps would not necessarily increase the customer base, rather it should improve customer service to the current customer base. Planning Associate Heller reported a single family residential area exists across the street to the north of The Station. She stated The Station building is attached to two other spaces, which are used as office and commercial. She indicated the building to the west is owned by the New Brighton Alano Society and a grocery store and a manufacturing company are located to the south. She stated this small commercial area is zoned B-2 which is appropriate for all the current uses except The Station. She mentioned a church exists across Adams Street to the east and several R-4 multi-family rental housing buildings are located to the west. Planning Associate Heller stated a zoning amendment to B-3 might seem inappropriate due to the lack of higher intensity commercial zoning in the area, however, this case is unique in that the use of the property would not change with the rezoning. Planning Associate Heller stated traffic access would not change and the driveways would remain the same. She indicated the additional pumps should improve traffic flow around the area. She stated the additional fuel pumps would allow more customers to pump fuel at the same time and reduce the traffic back-up waiting to access a pump. She stated the removal of the eastern section of the building should allow better traffic flow through the site as well. Planning Associate Heller explained gas stations require at least four parking spaces and the retail store requires one space for each 100 square feet of retail space plus one space per employee. She stated the parking requirements for The Station would be two spaces for two employees per shift, 12 spaces for the retail store, and four spaces for the gas pumps for a total of 18 spaces. She indicated there is enough paved surface on site to add one additional parking space, as 17 spaces currently exist on the site. Planning Associate Heller stated The Station owners do not anticipate adding additional retail space, however, there is enough room on site to add parking spaces if needed in the future. Mounds View Planning Commission March 7, 2007 Regular Meeting Page 4 ________________________________________________________________________ Planning Associate Heller stated that for the Commission to support the requested rezoning, it must find that the request would not be inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and would not cause or create adverse impacts to the surrounding properties. She stated a rezoning request is approved by ordinance with two readings by the City Council with the ordinance taking affect 30 days after the final reading. Chair Stevenson stated he would like the comprehensive definitions for highway commercial and neighborhood commercial included before it is passed on to Council. Planning Associate Heller read the definition of each for the Commission members. Chair Stevenson stated he sees a problem with that definition because there are two types of gas station and the Commission has only one to work with. He said this is a small community neighborhood gas station, not a highway designated station. He asked if the City could change the code or is this what is designated by the State. Community Development Director Ericson replied the Planning Commission could recommend a change to the comprehensive plan and the zoning code. He stated the Planning Commission could create the two class gas station system. He stated the zoning code requires gas stations be in a B-3 designation, if the station goes away, the Planning Commission could be looking at whether the property is a true B-3 planned use designation. He suggested if the Planning Commission considered that option, Staff would have to look at the comp plan and see where this type of gas station falls. Director Ericson stated it is a good suggestion as it would guard against a more intense land use coming onto the property at a later date. Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek asked how this would be incorporated into this proposal. Chair Stevenson replied it would be a two step process by making the change to the comprehensive plan designation definitions at this point. He mentioned that when the Comp Plan comes out in about two years, this change could be incorporated into the update process. He stated he thinks the Planning Commission could incorporate the definition change. He stated if this property is designated as Highway Commercial, there would be nothing stopping a Holiday gas station or other disruptive commercial entity from building there. Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek asked if there is information on why the two pumps were taken out. She asked why the City said they could not add them back in. Planning Associate Heller replied because it is a nonconforming lot. She explained with nonconforming you can take something away, but could not add to it. She stated The Station must have a 22,500 square foot site in order to become conforming. She explained that with the land purchase, they would now be able to meet that requirement and thus the other requests could now be met also. Chair Stevenson stated Commissioner Miller, Commissioner Meehlhause, and he were on the Planning Commission when this was brought up before. He stated he remembers the thoughts Mounds View Planning Commission March 7, 2007 Regular Meeting Page 5 ________________________________________________________________________ were more towards the size of the lot. He indicated it was denied due to the size of the lot at that time. Chair Stevenson stated the new proposal is much different. Commissioner Miller mentioned she liked the idea of a two tier designation. She stated County road I has a significant amount of traffic. Commissioner Cramblit asked if a CUP could be approved if this is kept as a neighborhood commercial designation. Chair Stevenson replied the Zoning Code would have to be changed to a B-3 for a gas station to exist on this property. He stated it had nothing to do with the Comprehensive Plan designation. Planning Associate Heller said to keep in mind that this is a one half acre site even with the purchase of the property. She stated it is highly unlikely that a larger gas station would fit on the property even if the purchased the rest of the Alano property. Chair Stevenson said if someone were to look at our Comp Plan and saw a Highway Commercial in this designated area, it would not look right. Director Ericson stated he looked at the Comp Plan and meshed it with the existing Zoning Code to see what the ramifications would be, and would this open the door to other smaller independent gas stations. He pointed out there are some properties zoned B-2 but do not have the neighborhood commercial designation, and another with the neighborhood commercial designation and not the B-2 zoning. He explained if the Planning Commission wanted to make the change to the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan, the change would effect this property and no others. Chair Stevenson commented he was thinking it would have to be a B-3 for a conforming gas station. Director Ericson replied only if that is the position of the Planning Commission and City Council. He explained they could recommend the Zoning Code allow for a conditional use neighborhood gas station in a B-2 district. Chair Stevenson stated he was thinking along the lines of a B-3 Neighborhood Commercial designation. Director Ericson pointed out a B-3 designation would open the door for more intensive commercial uses at that location; something that would not be a neighborhood type use. Commissioner Miller asked if a B-2 limited business also has a tier in it. Chair Stevenson stated he had not considered that, as he was thinking of allowing the B-3 gas station in a Neighborhood Commercial if it were kept to the four pumps. Mounds View Planning Commission March 7, 2007 Regular Meeting Page 6 ________________________________________________________________________ Director Ericson replied he could do that as long as the comp plan still reflected the Neighborhood Commercial designation. Commissioner Miller asked about the small market down the street that wanted to put in pumps. Director Ericson replied it is zoned B-1 and would not support a gas station because of the size of the lot, the zoning and the comprehensive plan. Commissioner Gunn clarified the B-1, B-2, and B-3 designations. She pointed out the gas station currently falls under the B-2 designation. Chair Stevenson stated the Commission is not quite ready to look at this. He indicated he did not want to see it designated as Highway Commercial. Director Ericson stated Staff agrees. Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek recommended stipulations as to the size of the gas station and to also look at lighting in commercial areas. She stated the ambient light from The Station’s additional canopy could cause a glow into the surrounding neighborhoods. She indicated she wants to know if Public Works looked at the environmental concerns of the underground storage tanks. Director Ericson replied the new tanks were installed in 1995 and had been inspected. Mr. Tom Manke, Co-Owner of The Station, stated two new tanks were installed in 1995. He said the lines are tested annually. He explained the two new pumps would be built to the south and tied into the existing tanks; no new tanks would be added. Mr. Manke explained ambient lighting for commercial use has changed in the recent years in that now 90 percent of the light shines down onto the dispensers. Director Ericson stated there is time to bring this back to the next meeting and prepare it for City Council. He indicated he and Planning Associate Heller would develop wording to address the issues related to the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Code. Chair Stevenson asked if there were members of the audience who would like to share their thoughts. Mr. Paul Fedor, 5491Adams Street, stated he owns the property south of The Station. He said he usually preaches about the expansion of business. He stated he is always for expansion and believes the City Council and Planning Commission should do anything in their power to aid new expansion, within reason. He stated he sat on the Planning Commission for nine years and spent a great deal of time on this issue. Mr. Fedor said the reason The Station was allowed there was because it was already in place. He stated he thought it would make more sense to develop the entire corner correctly with the necessary setbacks. He said that once a property is rezoned at Mounds View Planning Commission March 7, 2007 Regular Meeting Page 7 ________________________________________________________________________ a higher designation, it never goes back down. He believes this would increase traffic in the neighborhood. Chair Stevenson asked Mr. Fedor if there were more traffic problems previously with the four pumps. Mr. Fedor replied the four pumps were located on the north side of the station off County Road I so that is where most of the traffic entered and exited. He said most of the traffic enters and exits off Adams Street now. He stated this was a nonconforming use 50 years ago and did not know if Planning Commission should grant all these conditions just because it is there. He stated variances were approved for hardships when he was on the Planning Commission. He indicated this is not worthy of a change in the Comp Plan. He asked, relative to zoning, what the Commission would tell the next person who wanted a spot rezone. Commissioner Gunn asked if it is already zoned B-2, why is it classified as Neighborhood Commercial. Planning Associate Heller replied that is a Comp Plan designation. Director Ericson stated there is not a perfect marriage by name or between the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan. He explained the labels are different, causing confusion. He stated Mrs. Fedor gives some compelling reasons as to why you would change the Comprehensive Plan. He stated Staff would look at this and see if there is a way to address The Station without rezoning. He stated that perhaps there is a way to satisfy the needs of The Station, but to not change the zoning. Commissioner Miller asked if CUP would be needed if it were put into the B-2 designation. Director Ericson replied it is a B-2 zone, however, City Code did not recognize a CUP in a B-2 zone. He stated Staff needs to put some thought into this. Commissioner Miller stated she has seen cars lined up into the street to get in with two pumps. She said she did not think it would increase traffic, but might make the traffic flow better. Chair Stevenson stated the traffic congestion would decrease. Planning Associate Heller stated this was a public hearing and she did receive a call from the neighboring church across the street indicating that since very little would change on the property, they did not have any issues with this request. ______________________________________________________________________________ 6. Other Planning Activity A. Proposed Tree Preservation & Landscaping Ordinance Mounds View Planning Commission March 7, 2007 Regular Meeting Page 8 ________________________________________________________________________ Planning Associate Heller reported City Council had been talking about a tree preservation ordinance for several years. She stated she, Director Ericson, and Rick Wriskey, the City Forester, have been working on this for quite a while. She indicated they have talked to the City Council and received good suggestions. She stated they would also go to the Parks and Recreation Commission with the ordinance for their feedback. Planning Associate Heller stated the main goals of the ordinance is to encourage tree preservation, save larger existing trees, gain replacement trees when trees are removed, specify landscaping requirements for new development, and incorporate maintenance standards for landscaping such as removal of broken, fallen, or disease branches, trees, and stumps. She stated that the City realizes it is not reasonable to keep trees or wooded areas in some cases, but would like to be able to have some trees preserved and/or replaced. She explained there are exceptions to the replacement requirements, such as disease, storms, or other acts of nature, or trees lost as a result of utility trimming or maintenance. Planning Associate Heller explained the ordinance would not necessarily require a property owner to replace every tree taken down. She stated the ordinance puts a cap on the maximum number of replacement trees that would be required, depending on the size of the property and the amount of remaining trees. Planning Associate Heller asked the Planning Commission to review and discuss the planned ordinance. Chair Stevenson pointed out a lot of work had been put into this and this is needed. Commissioner Gunn asked about comments on page two stating property owners could be fined. She asked how a tree could be illegally removed if it is on their property. Planning Associate Heller replied it would be based on what might be done beyond what the ordinance states is allowable to remove. Commissioner Cramblit asked if the tree replacement would be on personal property or could they plant on a specified city property. Planning Associate Heller replied this was still up for discussion. She stated Staff is working on the idea on how the replacement trees would be implemented. She reported the City Forester would be involved with this. Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek applauded the effort for a tree ordinance. Her stated her concerns are about the resources needed to monitor residential tree maintenance or preservation and secondly she would not want the homeowners to get into a hardship condition. She stated as an example, tree damage due to disease or a storm; replacing trees could become quite expensive for homeowners. She stated she did not want to get into a situation where enforcement becomes overwhelming. Mounds View Planning Commission March 7, 2007 Regular Meeting Page 9 ________________________________________________________________________ Planning Associate Heller acknowledged enforcement would be hard. She stated often times if someone is cutting down trees, staff hears about it from the neighbors. She stated the City did not have the staff to keep track of whenever a tree is removed or the knowledge of how many trees there are in the City now. She replied that secondly, trees damaged due to disease or an act of nature would not have to be replaced. She stated they may have to be removed for safety reasons. Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek remarked she did not want the City Council or Planning Commission to become viewed as an enemy. Commissioner Meehlhause stated it addresses what happens if a tree is removed. He indicated the homeowner needs to have control of their property. Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek stated getting the word out will be a challenge and did not want to create a back log. She said she could see this directed more towards new development, but would have to look at it more concerning existing homeowners. Commissioner Cramblit responded that any new development should have a tree survey indicating the species of trees. He stated the developer must replace a percentage of each species removed. He agreed that it would be nearly impossible to police the existing trees. Commissioner Gunn asked if it says trees removed must be replaced one for one. Planning Associate Heller replied it would depend on the size of the tree and the number of trees removed. Commissioner Gunn asked who determines how many trees need to be replaced. Planning Associate Heller replied the City Forester would evaluate the property and recommend the number of trees. Commissioner Cramblit stated a stipulation could be added about the size the replacement tree must be. Commissioner Gunn replied some people could not afford to do this. Commissioner Cramblit stated if it is a mass development, roots are then removed. Chair Stevenson stated trees would not necessarily be put back in the same place. Commissioner Gunn likes the landscaping element. Commissioner Miller stated there have been provisions for landscaping for developments included in this new ordinance. Mounds View Planning Commission March 7, 2007 Regular Meeting Page 10 ________________________________________________________________________ A discussion among the Commissioners ensued on the criteria and specification for the ordinance. Chair Stevenson stated this is a good start and indicated it could be changed as needed. Planning Associate Heller explained ordinances are not perfect. She stated one thing this ordinance would do is create a tree inventory requirement. She stated often times a developer would submit a site plan, but this would enforce a tree by tree evaluation. She indicated a developer could possibly be given a credit towards the landscaping requirements for each tree saved. Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek asked if this would apply to developments or people looking at redoing their yards. Planning Associate Heller replied this is for development. She stated there might be individual cases where a homeowner wanted to remove all the trees in their yard to redo it for whatever reason. Planning Associate Heller asked everyone to let her know if there are more comments as this is still a work in progress. B. Review proposed Health & Beauty Services definition Community Development Director Ericson stated this request was presented by a business owner who would like to do some alternative wellness at Mounds View Square. He stated this was brought to the City Council and they asked that the applicant define more clearly what she is looking to do, look at the code and broaden what this encompasses. Director Ericson stated a whole range of alternative wellness uses are becoming more popular. He stated the applicant would like to provide healing touch and aromatherapy. He stated the resolution is to amend the code to define what health and beauty should include with respect to this particular business. He stated the resolution would expand the scope of health and beauty service definition in the code. Director Ericson stated it would include such things as hair salons, fingernail salons, nutrition and diet centers, meditation and yoga clinics, spa treatments and alternative wellness services such as aromatherapy, acupuncture and hypnosis, excluding therapeutic massage or other businesses otherwise defined or regulated by the code. Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek stated the hot rock massage might call it alternative wellness or therapeutic massage, so perhaps it should go into one area or another. Director Ericson stated the differentiation is if the hands are touching the body. He stated this is new ground for many cities. He indicated the League of Minnesota Cities has no information and many communities have nothing in their codes. He asked the Commissioners for any recommendations they have, or if they are happy with how the draft resolution is written, it could be approved and passed on to City Council. Mounds View Planning Commission March 7, 2007 Regular Meeting Page 11 ________________________________________________________________________ MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Gunn/Commissioner Cramblit. To approve Resolution 860-07, a Resolution Recommending Approval of an Amendment to Chapter 1102 of the Mounds View Zoning Code to Define “Health and Beauty Services.” Ayes – 6 Nays – 0 Motion carried. _____________________________________________________________________________ 7. Next Planning Commission Meetings: A. March 21, 2007 B. April 4, 2007 ______________________________________________________________________________ 8. Adjournment to Agenda Session There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the meeting at 8:29 p.m. ______________________________________________________________________________ (The meeting immediately adjourned to the Agenda Session) Respectfully submitted, Jim Ericson Community Development Director Transcribed by: Dianna Wise TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. Item No: 5A Meeting Date: March 21, 2007 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 Preliminary Plat for a proposed Major Subdivision at 8360 Long Lake Road; Planning Case MA2007-001 Introduction: Charlene Moschkau has submitted an application for a major subdivision of 8360 Long Lake Road. This parcel is towards the northern end of Long Lake Road, across from Ardan Park. The proposed 1.55 acre subdivision would create 3 buildable lots from the existing one lot. Char Moschkau has been designated the personal representative of the deceased landowner and now controls the property. Even though 8360 Long Lake Road is less than two acres in size, this is a major subdivision due to the fact that more than one additional lot is being created Discussion: In July 2006, a different applicant who had a purchase agreement with Char Moschkau for the property went through the subdivision process, with the final plat approved by City Council in August 2006. As a condition of the approval, the applicant was given 120 days after the date of approval to complete the process by recording the documents with Ramsey County and paying the park dedication fee to the City. The applicant did not follow through, thus the approval was voided in December 2006. The property owner has now chosen to complete the subdivision herself. The area identified as 8360 Long Lake Road is currently zoned R-1, Single Family Residential. The proposed subdivision would be consistent with the existing zoning of the property. All of the lots shown on the preliminary plat satisfy the minimum requirements of 75 feet lot width and 11,000 square foot lot area. This proposal plans to keep the existing home, which means the three lots will slightly differ in size, but all will far exceed the minimum lot size requirements. The new lot line between lots 2 and 3 will have a slight jog in it due to the requirement of lots being at least 75 feet wide and the house needing a 10 foot side setback. Even with the jog in the property line, Lot 3 will still have a 75 foot width at the front and back of the lot since the south property line slopes slightly to the southwest. Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designates 8360 Long Lake Road and the surrounding area as single family detached housing. The proposed subdivision would be consistent with that designation and consistent with the residential goals and policies as articulated in the Land Use section of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposal would also be consistent with specific housing goals and policies articulated in the Comp Plan. 8360 Long Lake Road Subdivision Staff Report - Page 2 Local Water Management Plan: Also known as the City’s Surface Water Management Plan, this planning document guides the City in regards to drainage and stormwater management. The project is located in the Judicial Ditch No. 1 minor watershed, AA-1 and AA-5 sub- watersheds. The boundary between these two sub-watersheds appears to run approximately through the middle of this lot. The minimum recommended building elevation for the AA-1 sub- watershed is set at 905.4 feet and AA-5 is 904.0 feet. Easements: The City’s Subdivision Code requires that plats dedicate perimeter drainage and utility easements for each lot in the subdivision. This plat does dedicate the necessary perimeter easements. There is a 45 foot drainage and utility easement along the west property line that would remain. There are no wetlands associated with this property. Streets: The three new lots will have access onto Long Lake Road, which is a county owned road. This street is adequate to handle the small amount of added traffic that two additional homes would create. Any work to the boulevard would require a permit from the county, and any alterations to the existing sidewalk would require a permit from the city. Park Dedication Requirements: The Subdivision Code indicates that any subdivision of land is subject to a park dedication fee. The dedication imposed is intended to mitigate public costs to the parks system associated with land development. The fee shall be reasonable and based on the extent of the development. In this case, the fee should be equal to 10% of the market value of the land. To establish the market value, staff uses Ramsey County assessed values as the basis for dedication computation. Since there is already one existing house on the property, the park dedication fee will be based on 2/3 of the land value. The 2007 Ramsey County total land value is $159,600 (2/3 = $106,400). The dedication amount then would be $10,640. This amount has been communicated to the applicant. Utilities: All utilities on the site would need to be installed underground, per Section 1203.10. Water and sanitary sewer lines are easily accessible. Traffic: The amount of daily vehicle trips on the proposed road will be minimal since only two additional housing units are proposed. There is currently one house on the property. On average, single-family homes generate about 10 vehicle trips per day, thus one could expect an additional 20 movements along Long Lake Road or as a result of this subdivision. Vegetation: The 1.55 acre site is mostly tree covered. The City Forester visited the site last summer and determined that there are four or five large Red Oak trees near the current house that would be worth making an effort to save when new homes are built. Staff recommends that upon each lot’s completion (after the house has been constructed) the yard areas shall be sodded and a minimum of two trees shall be in the front yard – whether they are existing trees or new ones planted if the existing trees must be removed. The new tree species shall be from a list provided by the City Forester. Wetlands: The National Wetlands Inventory Map and the City’s official Wetland Zoning Map do not identify a wetland within the property boundary. Since the property is over one acre in size, the applicant will need to apply for a general stormwater permit from the MPCA, and contact Rice Creek Watershed District to find out if they will require a permit also. 8360 Long Lake Road Subdivision Staff Report - Page 3 Public Input: While a public hearing is not required for the planning commission’s action, staff did send notices to property owners within 350 feet of the project area. Recommendation: Review the plans and discuss the proposed preliminary plat. Additional public input could be asked for at this time since notices were sent out. Staff review revealed no deficiencies at this time and thus Resolution 862-07 recommending approval of the preliminary plat has been drafted for your action if the Commission so desires. Heidi Heller Planning Associate Attachments: 1. Planning Application 2. Preliminary Plat 3. Zoning Map 4. Aerial View 5. Comp Plan Future Land Use Map 6. Photographic Documentation 7. Planning Commission Resolution 862-07 Zoning Map * Properties not indicated with a designation are zoned R-1, Single Family Residential Aerial View Proposed 3 lots – approx. Long Lake Road Ardan Park & Compost Site Photographic Documentation View of existing house– house is placed approximately in the middle of the 250 foot wide lot Current house View of south half of 8360 Long Lake Road Existing house View of north half of 8360 Long Lake Road MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 862-07 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR THE SUBDIVISION OF 8360 LONG LAKE ROAD; MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE NO. MA2007-001 WHEREAS, Charlene Moschkau has requested approval of a preliminary plat for the major subdivision of 8360 Long Lake Road, legally-described as follows: Lot 1, Block 1, Charles Hermann Addition WHEREAS, The above-described land is zoned R-1, Single-Family Residential and are designated as Single-Family Detached on the Comprehensive Plan; and, WHEREAS, Charlene Moschkau has submitted a Preliminary Plat for the major subdivision which creates 3 buildable lots; and, WHEREAS, the community development and public works 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 complies with county platting requirements; and, WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 1204.04, Subd. 4, the subdivision is subject to a park dedication fee which would be equivalent to 10% of 2/3 of the assessed value of the land area, which been determined to be $10,640.00; 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 this proposal: 1. Staff Report 2. Planning Application 3. Preliminary Plat 4. Zoning Map 5. Aerial View 6. Site Plan Resolution 862-07 Page 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends approval of the preliminary Plat submitted by Charlene Moschkau 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 pay a park dedication fee in the recommended amount of $10,640. 3. The applicant shall take all steps to save any trees possible during the construction and shall make arrangements to have a minimum of two trees in each front yard upon project completion and sod all yard areas. 4. The applicant shall obtain permits, if required, from Rice Creek Watershed District and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency before construction activity commences. 5. All utilities within the development area and to the individual home sites shall be located underground. 6. The applicant shall apply for Final Plat approval no later than 6 months after the date of approval of the preliminary plat, or the Preliminary Plat approval will become null and void. BE IT FURTHER 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 21st day of March, 2007. __________________________________________ Gary Stevenson, Chairperson ATTEST: _____________________________________ James Ericson Community Development Director (SEAL) Item No: 6A Meeting Date: March 21, 2007 Type of Business: Discussion City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Mounds View Planning Commission From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate Item Title/Subject: Consideration of Amendments to the Mounds View Zoning Code: Chapter 1102 Amendment to Define “Neighborhood Motor Fuel Station” and Chapter 1113 Amendment to allow a “Neighborhood Motor Fuel Station” as a conditional use in a B-2 District. After discussion at the March 7th Planning Commission meeting, Staff has been working on a solution to allow The Station at 2280 County Road I, to become a conforming use without having to rezone their property or do a comprehensive plan amendment. The Planning Commission indicated that they were supportive of The Station’s desire to become conforming and add two additional fuel pumps, but were hesitant to change the property to a higher intensity designation because of what that could be opening this site up to in the future if the owners were to sell the property. The Station is a very small scale gas station compared to a Holiday or SuperAmerica. Currently the zoning code only has one definition of a motor fuel station, regardless of size. The Planning Commission felt that The Station could be defined as a “neighborhood gas station” and allowed to operate in less than a B-3 zoning district. Staff did some research to see if other cities have different gas station definitions, and what zoning districts they allow gas stations to operate in. Five cities zoning codes were looked at: Maplewood, Arden Hills, Vadnais Heights, Blaine and Fridley. A few did have two gas station distinctions: “convenience food store with accessory gas pumps” and a ‘service station” which may have auto services also. The cities that defined a Service Station, only allowed them in at least a B-3 or comparable zoning district, whereas, the convenience food store with gas pumps was allowed, depending on the city, in B-1 or B-2 districts. All the cities except Maplewood, allow gas stations in lower zoned business districts than a B-3 (or comparable), and all five of the cities only allow a gas station as a conditional use. Staff is proposing that the Mounds View Zoning Code could be amended to define a “Neighborhood Motor Fuel Station” and to allow a smaller gas station in a B-2 zoning district as a conditional use. Staff has drafted a definition for a Neighborhood Motor Fuel Station and the proposed addition to the B-2 zoning code, Chapter 1113, allowing a Neighborhood Motor Fuel Station to be allowed as a conditional use. The City Attorney has reviewed this proposal and indicates this could be a satisfactory option rather than rezoning and a Comp Plan Amendment to a higher intensity use. Recommendation: Discuss if this proposal is the direction that the Planning Commission would like to go, rather than a rezoning and comprehensive plan amendment for The Station gas station. Respectfully submitted, Heidi Heller Zoning Code Amendment Report Page 2 Existing gas station definition, Chapter 1102 MOTOR FUEL STATION: A place where gasoline (stored only in underground tanks), kerosene, motor oil, lubricants or greases, for operation of automobiles, are retailed directly to the public on premises and including minor accessories and services for automobiles but not including major repairs and rebuilding of automobiles. Existing Chapter 1114.04, B-3 District. Subd. 3. Motor fuel station, auto repair, minor and tire battery stores and service; provided, that: a. Regardless of whether the dispensing, sales or offering for sale of motor fuels and/or oil is incidental to the conduct of the use or business, the standards and requirements imposed by this Title for motor fuel stations shall apply. These standards and requirements are, however, in addition to other requirements which are imposed for other uses of the property. b. The architectural appearance and functional plan of the building and site shall not be so dissimilar to the existing buildings or area as to cause impairment in property values or constitute a blighting influence within a reasonable distance of the lot. c. The entire site, other than that taken up by a building, structure or plantings, shall be surfaced with a material to control dust, drainage and erosion which is subject to the approval of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. d. A minimum lot area of twenty two thousand five hundred (22,500) square feet and minimum lot dimensions of one hundred fifty feet by one hundred thirty feet (150' x 130') be provided. e. A drainage system, subject to the approval of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer, shall be installed. f. A curb not less than six inches (6") above grade shall separate the public sidewalk from motor vehicle service areas. g. The lighting shall be accomplished in such a way as to have no direct source of light visible from adjacent land in residential use or from the public right of way and shall be in compliance with Section 1103.09 of this Title. h. Wherever fuel pumps are to be installed, pump islands shall be installed. i. At the boundaries of a residential district, a strip of not less than ten feet (10') shall be landscaped and screened in compliance with subdivisions 1103.08(l) through (5) of this Title. j. Each light standard island and all islands in the parking lot shall be landscaped or covered. Zoning Code Amendment Report Page 3 k. Parking or car magazine storage space shall be screened from view of abutting residential districts in compliance with subdivisions 1103.08(l) through (5) of this Title. l. Vehicular access points shall create a minimum of conflict with through traffic movement, shall comply with Chapter 1121 of this Title and shall be subject to the approval of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. m. All signing and informational or visual communication devices shall be minimized and shall be in compliance with the Mounds View Sign Code 1 . n. Provisions are made to control and reduce noise. o. No outside storage except as allowed in compliance with subdivision 4 of this Section shall exist. p. No outside sale or service except as allowed in compliance with subdivision 5 of this Section shall exist. q. Sale of products other than those specifically mentioned in this Section shall be subject to the conditional use permit. r. All conditions pertaining to a specific site are subject to change when the City Council, upon investigation in relation to a formal request, finds that the general welfare and public betterment can be served as well or better by modifying the conditions. s. The provisions of subdivision 1125.01(1)e of this Title are considered and satisfactorily met. 1 See Chapter 1008 of this Code. Zoning Code Amendment Report Page 4 PROPOSED ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE TO BE ADDED TO THE ZONING CODE FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD MOTOR FUEL STATION Proposed addition to Definitions, Chapter 1102: NEIGHBORHOOD MOTOR FUEL STATION: A place where gasoline (stored only in underground tanks), kerosene, motor oil, lubricants or greases, for operation of automobiles, are retailed directly to the public on premises with a small number of fuel dispensing pumps. Proposed addition to B-2 District, Chapter 1113 Chapter 1113.04: Conditional Uses: Subd. 8. Neighborhood Motor Fuel Station; provided, that: a. Regardless of whether the dispensing, sales or offering for sale of motor fuels and/or oil is incidental to the conduct of the use or business, the standards and requirements imposed by this Title for motor fuel stations shall apply. These standards and requirements are, however, in addition to other requirements which are imposed for other uses of the property. b. There shall be a maximum of four motor fuel dispensing pumps on the site. c. There shall be no automotive service, repair or rebuilding allowed on the site. d. The architectural appearance and functional plan of the building and site shall not be so dissimilar to the existing buildings or area as to cause impairment in property values or constitute a blighting influence within a reasonable distance of the lot. e. The entire site, other than that taken up by a building, structure or plantings, shall be surfaced with a material to control dust, drainage and erosion which is subject to the approval of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. f. A minimum lot area of twenty two thousand five hundred (22,500) square feet and minimum lot dimensions of one hundred fifty feet by one hundred thirty feet (150' x 130') be provided. g. A drainage system, subject to the approval of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer, shall be installed. h. A curb not less than six inches (6") above grade shall separate the public sidewalk from motor vehicle service areas. i The lighting shall be accomplished in such a way as to have no direct source of light visible from adjacent land in residential use or from the public right of way and shall be in compliance with Section 1103.09 of this Title Zoning Code Amendment Report Page 5 j. Wherever fuel pumps are to be installed, pump islands shall be installed. k. At the boundaries of a residential district, a strip of not less than ten feet (10') shall be landscaped and screened in compliance with subdivisions 1103.08(l) through (5) of this Title. l. Each light standard island and all islands in the parking lot shall be landscaped or covered. m. Parking or car magazine storage space shall be screened from view of abutting residential districts in compliance with subdivisions 1103.08(l) through (5) of this Title. n. Vehicular access points shall create a minimum of conflict with through traffic movement, shall comply with Chapter 1121 of this Title and shall be subject to the approval of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. o. All signing and informational or visual communication devices shall be minimized and shall be in compliance with the Mounds View Sign Code 2 . p. Provisions are made to control and reduce noise. q. No outside storage except as allowed in compliance with subdivision 4 of this Section shall exist. r. No outside sale or service shall exist. s. Sale of products other than those specifically mentioned in this Section shall be subject to the conditional use permit. t. All conditions pertaining to a specific site are subject to change when the City Council, upon investigation in relation to a formal request, finds that the general welfare and public betterment can be served as well or better by modifying the conditions. u. The provisions of subdivision 1125.01(1)e of this Title are considered and satisfactorily met. 2 See Chapter 1008 of this Code.