Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPL MINUTES 03181980 Meeting Sheet IIIIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIIIIIIIII 102169 Box: 21 Folder: PL MINUTES AND AGENDAS 1980 Document: PL MINUTES 03181980 CITY OF :ST. ANTHONY. PLANNING COMMISSION .MINUTES • March .18 , 1980 The meeting was called to order at 7 :30 p.m. by Doug Jones in the absence -6f the Chairman and- Chairman Pro Tem. Present for roll' call: • Peterson, . Enrooth, Jones and Makowske. Absent: Bjorklund., Bowerman and Sopcinski. Also present: Ron Berg, Administrative Assistant. Jim Fornell, ' City Manager, arrived at 8 :21 p.m. The following corrections and additions were made to the minutes for the Planning Commission meeting February 19 . Page 3, _para. 2 : Line 7 _should read "the properties ; to the 'north' do not. ... . " Page 5 , para. 2 : Should be "Jerry's" not ".Kelly's" Toys Page 5, para. -3 : Jim Gaha.gen had -requested the full text of his statement on the Compre- hensive Plan .be .included in the min- utes as follows: "Mr. Gahagen sug- gested that merchants .look at the different proposals and see how they might be affected by each plan - A, B, C, or D, and begin planning them- selves. They must try to control their destiny. They must keep their options open. Proper -planning just might show that relocation - moving out of the area is the right move for you. " The question of whether the Commission intended to establish the September 1, 1980 date for removal of the mobile office unit by Central Engineering was raised and Mrs. Makowske said that date had been established as the deadline after which the unit will have to be removed -if-construction was .not begun, or will have to re- appear for an extension of the permit. No changes in that regard were made to the minutes. Irving Peterson will represent the Commission at the next Council meeting, March 25. At 7 : 40 p.m. , Mr.:. Jones -opened the Public Hearing on the variances which would permit the construction of a _five store shopping area at 2520-2540 39th Avenue N.E. by the Antler Corporation, 2954 Rice • Street, St. Paul, for the Towle Company. Notification of the hearing was made as required by .City Ordinance, Mr.. Berg confirmed, and an application fee of $25 paid. No one present reported failure to receive notice or objected to its content. i ' -2- _1 . r. Jack Gysbers,- of the Antler . Corporation, and Warren H. Kelly, of • Towle Real Estate Company, were present to discuss the proposed 25, 000 square foot retail facility which would .be located at the. southeast corner of 3.9th Avenue. N.E.._and Apache Lane. . Variances =r required for such a commercial project are: two side. yard setbacks; s parking spaces; and• parking 'lot variances as outlined in Mr. Berg' s March 14 memorandum to the Commission. Mr. Gysbers saw this ordinance restriction requiring a 35-foot side yard setback on a dead end street as "an undue hardship" for the proposal.. ' Mr. Berg responded that Apache Lane is the only entrance. to the Country Store and said he considered the 25-foot variance to be excessive. Mr. Jones added that the same ordinance applies consistently to all properties in the City and the road has been there for a long time and Antler .should have been aware of it" . . Mr. Kelly had, in the application, insisted the shops will cater- to one stop shoppers and not generate the need for additional parking, but instead will "boost the sagging retail facility in Apache Shop- ping Center" . The point, however, was made by the staff that the City has no provision in -its ordinance for controlling the types of business which might go- in the shops and the- provision of only 52 parking spaces; where 83 are required, would seem to be .inadequate. There would also be no space provided for snow storage on the site, since the proposed parking lot area of 14 ,724 square feet is almost 1, 000 square feet short of the required 15 ,600. Speaking in opposition to the variances were James Wall, a member • of the Apache Plaza Merchants Association Board, .and .T.ed Zinner, a representing the C. G. Rein Company, managers of Apache Plaza. i Mr. Wall said he would like to see the new business come into the area "especially in the mall" , but felt the "strip malls draw busi- a ness . from- the major shopping center. " He -said .the Association was "formally against the project. " He also said:!-these shops could be located in the mall where there was probably room enough in the space vacated by Montgomery Ward to .serve all five- stores. In their March 14 letter of opposition to the variances, the Association j had contended there would be "too high a concentration of shops in this small area. " A Mr. Zinner speculated the applicants, whether intentionally or not, had accepted the probability that their customers will use the Apache parking area if none is available on their property. He told u Mrs. Makowske. Apache would not be interested in leasing parking space for the new stores in deference to their own tenants ' interests- He nterests He wanted to have fair competition, but considered the -establishment of a competing retail area .as "defeating the purpose of Apache, which was established to serve the needs of the community-. " He ,agreed there will be no control of the type .of stores under the existing ordinance. . Ruth Welch,* Manager of Apache, was present and indicated she supported the opposition expressed by Mr. Zinner and Mr. Wall. A poll of the Commission members indicated the following: -Mrs. Makowske favored bringing new businesses into the area, but was concerned with ' • putting up a new building when there is retail space available nearby. - She could see the probability of a problem with the parking. Y -3- Mr. Peterson said he -.saw no . justification .for granting these variances because the proponents had -failed to .address' satisfactorily the conditions under. which the variances can be granted. Mr. .Enrooth speculated that not granting the .var.iances might limit the center to four rather than five outlets -and. .Mr. -Berg agreed j that if that were the case, :.there -would probably be no variances i necessary. Mr. Jones- felt the Apache owners were justified in -their concerns regarding the parking--for the new center. However, he did not want _ to discourage the developers, but rather suggested they might be able to come up with a modified proposal which might work. M.r.. Gysbers and Mr. Kelly announced their willingness to -withdraw their proposal and to work with City staff to develop a plan which may be more acceptable to the City. Mr. Jones closed the Public -Hearing at 8:.10 p.m. 1 Mr. Berg related the .Fas Gas Station at 3001 37th Avenue N.E. had changed the plastic price and identification on -their free-standing sign to enable them to use four figures instead of three. The sign consultant had indicated to him that it had -not -occurred to him that he had to get .the City' s approval -for the change since the company had made the changes at..all their stations throughout the metro- politan. area without .consulting. the municipalities- where they were • located, and because he felt .there was essentially -no change in the sign.. The existing sign, .however, was non-conforming to the City Sign Ordinance since a six-foot variance was granted to Pas Gas in _II 1973. Under the Ordinance, a non-conforming sign cannot be "altered to change the image" . Although Commission .members agreed that a precedent for such a sign change had been set for the Mico Station a few blocks west of Fas Gas, the question was raised whether the sign is .located..within a right of way which might be required by Ramsey County for that intersection when 37th Avenue N.E. is rebuilt, and whether the granting of ,the necessary- variance may appreciate the value of -the sign for payment by .the county if they have not already acquired the strip for a right of way. Mr. Fornell arrived at 8 :21 p.m. Motion by Mr. Peterson -and seconded by Mr. -Enrooth *to table action on a sign variance for Pas Gas until staff has provided further information regarding 'Ramsey County' s plans -for the intersection °J of 37th Avenue N.E. and Silver Lake Road. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting was recessed .from 8 : 25 p.m. to 8 :30 p.m. , at which time • Mr. Jones reconvened the Public Hearing on the City's Comprehensive Plan, which had been recessed from February 19 . Eight persons, .in- cluding Councilman-Marks, representatives of the business community i -4- of St.- Anthony Shopping Center, and John Hatcher; joined in the • continued discussion- of -the Plan. At the request of Mr. Hatcher, the Manager explained why the Plan had :been developed and what its objectives are, -saying the Plan is not intended -as a statement of action, but rather a. delineation of alternatives open to the com- munity. He answered questions from Jerry Kelly -regarding the street improvement plan, by telling him .a majority of the bituminous roads in the City have far outlived their life .expectancies _and. are now being held together- by seal coating. Most of the concrete roads, with the exception of that portion on 36th Avenue N.E. , east of Silver Lake Road- and Chandler Drive, which was installed improperly, are in relatively good shape. . The City hired an engineering con- sultant to make -a study of the streets and specific recommendations have been made regarding their. repair or replacement. Councilman Marks said he saw the Plan as establishing what the City hopes to accomplish; where it came from and where it wants to go. He said a good portion of the Plan is devoted to the St. Anthony Shopping Center and if it is finally. concluded_the problems there can only be solved by setting up an H.R.A. , this decision will have to be made as a community effort. { Mr. Berg gave the timetable for final approval of the Plan and Mr. Hatcher questioned whether any other effort other than that set down in the Plan will be precluded from development by the Plan, or whether the Plan should be viewed as a -set of guidelines which must be more or less followed for future development. Councilman • Marks said he saw the Plan as somewhat of a legal tool for pre- { cluding any development which the City might see as unacceptable. At the request of one of the merchants, J,. Haugen of J. .Design, Commission members indicated which of the alternatives for the shopping center area they were prone to favor. Mr. Jones said he favors Plan C with the stipulation that soil . conditions in the center be determined prior to any high density development there. He saw Plan D as too ambitious for a community of St. Anthony' s size and believes there is already a viable shop- ping center established along Highway 88. Mr. Fornell said Plan C doesn' t have to be housing-oriented, but could have economic development projects as well as housing if the owners and merchants in the area can come up with- a viable plan for tax increment fin- ancing. Mr. Enrooth thought it was premature for the Commission to indicate their preferences since the purpose of the .hearing is to get feedback from the community on which such a determination can be made. He personally saw something had to be done about the "Saliterman center" and he was personally "all for something happening and happening soon. " Mr. Peterson- said he would be friendliest towards Plan C, but had not by any means made up his mind at this point. He felt it was very useful to first get -people involved and share some of their concerns. • Mrs. Makowske could see the merits of Plan D so the landton which the mobile park is located could be better utilized, but wasn't certain she could approve high density housing going into the -5- 3 I t 1 shopping center. She would prefer a better business improvement . 11 for the area; but can 't endorse any of the alternatives until she • receives more input from the community. l 1 Mr. Haugen then recounted the problems experienced by the merchants with the . Saliterman ownership and their reluctance to make improve- ments in the center. He said he had personally met with Elliott j Saliterman who said there are no plans to make changes in the parking area since plans- have been negotiated for the area for development by the Golden Rule Stores. The shopping center owner had showed 3 Mr. Haugen these plans and promised to bring them to the hearing that evening. However, Mr. Saliterman had told him the worst sec- tion of roadway in- the parking lot is owned by the City. This was determined to be the extension of Coolidge Street N.E. which runs behind the Penny' s Supermarket. Mr. Fornell said the roadway was never built to withstand- semi-truck traffic and rebuilding it will be an expensive proposition. Mr. Haugen said he- is spokesman for the rest of the merchants in his center who are very concerned with what is going to happen there. He said he sees improvements_in the economic condition of that center and his own business is growing rapidly and he would like to make some interior improvements to his shop if he were certain there will be no immediate changes. If Mr. Saliterman had kept his promise to come to the hearing, Mr. • Haugen said the merchants would have supported him in his plans for redevelopment, but he now sees a unified effort on their part to force the landlords to make the improvement in the parking area. The history of the City' s various efforts to stimulate improvements in the Kenzie Terrace commercial area was recounted by the Manager and Councilman Marks. Lir. Fornell told Mr. Haugen the City might have some leverage for forcing improvements through the City par- king lot ordinance, but he questioned whether that would really be dealing with the problem, or perhaps be "only applying a bandaid. " Mr. Berg agreed the City can force the cleaning up of the rubbish left behind whon Snyder' s left, however. Mr. Hatcher supported the assumption that the sub-soil in the shopping center might not support high density construction and suggested an intensive publicizing of the hearings to attract more community interest. Mr. Jones told of the various forms of communication which had been used already and said he didn't know how much more could be done. Dr. Charles Kirk did not see the merchants as being very effective in making any improvements in the center, seeing improvement coming about only through the efforts of the owners and the City. The owner of the laundromat agreed with that assumption. Mr. Jones 'and Councilman Marks answered questions regarding recent developments in the provision of senior housing across Kenzie Terrace from- the shoppi;:n center. The Commission agreed the hearing should • be continued and in the interim they will prepare to make recommenda- tions regarding the Plan for presentation at their next meeting. Mr. Peterson said -he appreciated the-..interest demonstrated for the Plan and Mr Enroo.th said he hopes that interest will not wane• since citizen input. is necessary ,:for effective decisions for the City. Motion by Mrs.. Makowske -and :seconded ..by Mr.. Peterson to recess the hearing 'at 9_:35 p.m. to .be.-.continued during the Commission' s next meeting April 15., 1980. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Mr. *Peterson and .seconded by Mrs. Makowske to adjourn the meeting at 9: 36 p.m. .Motion carried unanimously. Respectfully submitted, Helen Crowe,, Secretary i .1 ,I .1 f - F