HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-04-2019 PCAPPROVED
PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Regular Meeting
September 4, 2019
Mounds View City Hall
2401 Mounds View Boulevard, Mounds View, MN 55112
______________________________________________________________________________
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by Chair Stevenson at 7:00 p.m. for September 4, 2019.
______________________________________________________________________________
2. Roll Call
Members Present: Commissioners Farmer, French, Klander, Monn, Nelson, Rundle, and
Stevenson.
Absent and Excused: None.
Also Present: Community Development Director Jon Sevald and Council Member Bill
Bergeron.
______________________________________________________________________________
Index to Minutes Page
Resolution1106-19 Consideration of a Variance to Reduce the Side Yard 2
Setback from 5’ to 3’ for a driveway at 8405 Red Oak Drive
Boulevard Apartments – Discussion of Screening 3
Approval of Minutes 5
_____________________________________________________________________________
3. Special Order of Business
None.
4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda
None.
______________________________________________________________________________
Mounds View Planning Commission September 4, 2019
Regular Meeting Page 2
________________________________________________________________________
5. Planning Cases
A. Public Hearing: Resolution 1106-19, Consideration of a Variance to Reduce
the Side Yard Setback from 5’ to 3’ for a Driveway, for property located at
8405 Red Oak Drive (Planning Case VR2019-004)
Community Development Director Sevald stated in 2009, as part of the Area A street
reconstruction project, the City installed a one-car wide driveway apron with a 3’ side yard
setback to match that of the existing dirt driveway original to the house (1941). In June 2019,
the applicant applied for a Zoning Permit to replace the dirt driveway. The request included a 0’
setback to match an existing concrete driveway (parking pad) in front of the garage (installed
without a permit by the previous owner). The dirt driveway meandered some, but was generally
within 1’ of the property line. The permit was approved, pending compliance with a 5’ setback,
and provided options to apply for a Variance for a 0’ setback; or an Administrative Variance for
a 3’ setback.
Community Development Director Sevald reported in June, the applicant installed the driveway
with a 5’ setback at the front, and a 3’ setback at the parking pad, and applied for an
Administrative Variance. The Administrative Variance was preliminarily approved by the
Community Development Director, conditioned upon no objections from adjacent property
owners, and upon final review by the Planning Commission. The Commission considered the
case at its July 10, 2019 meeting, voting 4-1 to approve the review of the Administrative
Variance. Because a super majority is required (5 of 7 Commissioners), the Motion failed, and
the Administrative Variance was Denied. Upon denial, the Applicant had the option to apply for
a regular Variance, and has done so. Staff recommended the Planning Commission hold a public
hearing and approve a Variance to reduce the side yard from 5’ to 3’.
Tim Rogers, 8405 Red Oak Drive, introduced himself to the Commission. He provided a brief
explanation of his request noting he would like to receive a two-foot variance to the five-foot
side yard setback. He stated this request was being made in order to allow him to drive around a
very large oak tree.
Commissioner Monn asked if the variance was towards the fence. Mr. Rogers reported the
variance would be towards the garage. He noted he would be having his property surveyed.
Chair Stevenson requested further information on the retaining wall removal. Community
Development Director Sevald explained the City does not allow structures within the public
right-of-way, except for mailboxes. For this reason, the retaining wall would have to be
removed. Mr. Rogers expressed frustration with the fact he was being required to remove this
retaining wall when he had a great deal of neighbors that had structures in the right-of-way.
Commissioner Farmer questioned how the apron fit onto the applicant’s property. Community
Development Director Sevald stated the concrete apron was installed by the City in the late
1990’s. The City tried to match the dirt driveway as best it could while still aligning with the
Mounds View Planning Commission September 4, 2019
Regular Meeting Page 3
________________________________________________________________________
property lines and setbacks. He reported the edge of the apron was three feet from the property
line. He believed it made the most sense for the new driveway to align with the concrete apron.
Commissioner Klander encouraged Mr. Rogers to rent a metal detector to try and locate the pins
versus hiring a surveyor because this was quite expensive. Mr. Rogers thanked Commissioner
Klander for making this suggestion.
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Rundle/Commissioner Farmer. To approve Resolution
1106-19, a Resolution Recommending Approval of a Variance for a Reduced Driveway Setback
at 8405 Red Oak Drive; Planning Case No. VR2019-004.
Ayes – 6 Nays – 1 (Monn) Motion carried.
6. Other Planning Activity
A. Boulevard Apartments – Discussion of Screening
Community Development Director Sevald stated the Boulevard Apartments is being constructed
at the corner of Mounds View Boulevard and Groveland Road, and is nearing completion. As
part of the approved Development Review, a 6’ cedar privacy fence is to be installed along the
eastern property line with the intent of providing screening for homes along Groveland Road.
The fence was a topic of discussion by the Planning Commission (August 16, 2017). A portion
of the eastern property line is heavily wooded. Many trees will need to be removed in order to
install the fence. Because the parking lot is at a higher elevation than the eastern property line,
the fence would provide minimal screening compared to if the trees remained as-is. There are
two alternatives:
1. Locate the fence on the west side of the woods (e.g. do not follow the property
line). Doing so, preserves the woods as-is. The fence would act as a deterrent to
trespass.
2. The Developer to meet with adjacent property owners, and mutually agree on the
type of screening to be installed, likely a combination of fencing in open areas,
and trees/shrubs in more wooded areas.
Community Development Director Sevald commented with Development Reviews, Staff has
some leeway to interpret what is and is not consistent with the approved plans. In this case, how
things look on paper and how they look in person are entirely different; thus, Staff is requesting
guidance from the Planning Commission. He reviewed the proposed location for the fence,
noting it would run through the proof of parking area and requested feedback from the
Commission on how to proceed.
Commissioner Nelson asked what the original plan was for the fence. Community Development
Director Sevald reported the fence was to be a six-foot cedar fence.
Mounds View Planning Commission September 4, 2019
Regular Meeting Page 4
________________________________________________________________________
Chair Stevenson supported the applicant not installing a fence through the trees. However, he
was uncertain where the fence should be located.
Commissioner Monn asked how many trees would be lost. Community Development Director
Sevald reported he did not have a count, but stated from the photos he has seen, the tree loss
would be extensive.
Commissioner Nelson commented it would be a maintenance nightmare to locate a cedar fence
under a large grove of trees. He recommended that only one type of fence be installed.
Chris Stokka, MWF Properties, introduced himself to the Commission. He explained he talked
to the contractor about the fence to see what all of the options were. He was informed that a
cedar fence would be the best option. He indicated he would be responsible for maintaining the
fence. He commented his main concern at this time was to maintain as many trees as possible.
Commissioner Monn questioned if there would be a fence located around the kids play area. Mr.
Stokka commented further on the location of the proposed fence.
Chair Stevenson stated after reviewing the pictures, he could support a change to the fencing
location.
Commissioner Nelson commented he liked the idea of a fence, but suggested a maintenance free
fence be considered. Community Development Director Sevald reported the original direction
given by the City was for a six-foot cedar fence. He explained the fence building material would
be determined to the developer.
Mr. Stokka explained he could not promise Trex fencing material, but would take this into
consideration.
Commissioner Klander encouraged the developer to ensure that the property line is clearly
identified, to ensure there would not be confusion. Mr. Stokka stated this would be done and
explained the fence would assist the tenants from trespassing onto the neighbor’s property.
Consensus of the Commission was to support the fence being located on the west edge in order
to preserve the trees.
______________________________________________________________________________
7. Reports
A. Upcoming Planning Cases & Activity
Community Development Director Sevald explained he had no upcoming planning cases at this
time.
Mounds View Planning Commission September 4, 2019
Regular Meeting Page 5
________________________________________________________________________
B. Staff Updates
Community Development Director Sevald provided the Commission with an update from staff.
He reported the Boulevard Apartments were nearing completion. He indicated the Council would
be considering a vacation of Greenfield Avenue on Monday, September 9th. He explained the
Skyline Motel was burned down last week.
C. Council Updates
Council Member Bergeron provided the Planning Commission with an update from the City
Council. He explained the Council held a retreat to discuss worksession and City Council
meeting structures. He reported the Council held a First Reading and public hearing for the
Tobacco 21 Ordinance and the Second Reading would be held on Monday, September 9th. He
commented further on a change that was made to the City’s charitable gambling licenses noting
the City would now be capturing 10% of charitable gambling proceeds. These funds would be
redistributed to local non-profits.
D. Planning Commissioner Reports
Commissioner Klander encouraged Commission members to let staff know if they would not be
able to attend meetings. He explained this would assist staff and make staff aware if there was
not a quorum of Commission members available.
8. Approval of Minutes
August 7, 2019.
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Klander/Commissioner Rundle. To approve the Minutes
of the August 7, 2019 regular Planning Commission meetings as presented.
Ayes – 7 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
9. Next Planning Commission Meeting:
A. Wednesday, September 18, 2019
B. Wednesday, October 2, 2019
______________________________________________________________________________
10. Adjournment
There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the
meeting at 7:56 p.m.
______________________________________________________________________________
Mounds View Planning Commission September 4, 2019
Regular Meeting Page 6
________________________________________________________________________
Respectfully submitted,
Jon Sevald
Community Development Director
Transcribed by:
Heidi Guenther
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.