Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPL MINUTES 09161980 Meeting Sheet IIIIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIIIIIIIII 102156 Box: 21 Folder: PL MINUTES AND AGENDAS 1980 Document: PL MINUTES 09161980 • CITY OF ST. ANTHONY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES September 16 , 1980 The meeting was called to order by Chairman Bjorklund at 7 :30 P.M. Present for roll call: Bowerman, Bjorklund, .Sopcinski and Enrooth. Absent: Jones , Makowske and Peterson. Also present: Ron Berg, Administrative Assistant. Motion by Mr. Bowerman and seconded by Mr-. Sopcinski to approve as submitted the minutes for the Planning Commission meeting field August 19 , 1980. Motion carried unanimously. Mr.. Sopcinski .will represent the Commission at the next Council meeting to be held September 23 , 1980. Mr. Jones arrived at 7 : 33 P.M. and .Mrs. Makowske at 7 :34 P.M. Accepted as addendum to the agenda was the request for a new • building review for Central, Engineering, under 8a and a progress report . on the sign ordinance under 8b. The Chairman opened the public hearing on the Solie variance petition at 7 : 35 P.M. by reading the notice of the hearing which had gone out to the affected property owners listed in the agenda. Mr. Berg confirmed that the application fee had been paid. There was no one present who reported failure to receive the notice nor objected to its contents. Mr. Berg reiterated some of the points made in his September 12th recommendation for allowing the variances necessary for permitting a garage to be built on. the front of the existing residence at 2817 Silver Lane which will leave the front yard with only a 20 foot front yard setback where 30 is required. Ken Solie, 3200 Wendhurst Avenue N.E. , presented the site plans for the proposal. which includes a 50 X 14 foot addition to the rear for which no variances are required. He said his adjoining neighbors have indicated they do not oppose the project as proposed. . The applicant said the garage would be difficult to place next to the house because footings from a cabin structure are still buried in that location. He told Mr. Bowerman the entrance to the garage will be on the east side of the addition leaving a finished side towards Silver Lane. Mr. Berg noted that some structures along Silver Lane are closer to the roadway than the proposed addition. Mr. Solie detailed the landscaping he proposes which will provide greater screening of the additions from his neighbors. He said the proposal, as presented , -2- will provide him with. a greater living area at the same time it will • leave -.his view of the lake unobstructed. .The. Chairman '.read letters of approval of the project from neighbors, Johanna .Lucious ,. 2821 Silver Lane, and Andrew .Szurek, 2809 Silver Lane. Mr. Jones reported he had .talked with another neighbor to the west,: Floyd Rissell, 2805 Silver Lane, who had no 'objections to the garage addition as proposed. No one else was present to speak for or: against the proposal. and the public hearing was closed at 7 :44 P.M. for Commission action. Mr. Jones said he believed the turnaround driveway- planned by Mr. Solie "is. almost mandatory on- that winding street .where there is so much speeding traffic" . He pointed out that,. even with the garage, Mr. Solie- will have 39, feet of front yard to the street. Mrs. Makowske wondered whether the older garage structure to the west, which is within 10 feet of the neighbor 's front lot line, might not be removed later leaving this proposed structure out of line with the rest of the street. Mr. Sopcinski told her there are three or four more structures to: the west . which are not within the required setbacks and there does not seem to be uniformity of front yards along that street. Motion by Mr. Sopcinski and seconded by Mr. Bowerman to recommend Council .approval of the petition for variances from Kenneth Solie • for the property at 2817 Silver Lane to permit the siting of the proposed garage addition to within 20 feet of the front yard lot lines as shown- on the site plans (which were initialed by Mr. Bjorklund) finding that; (1) the existing City ordinances, which were adopted after 1955 when the structure on the property was built, do not permit upgrading that structure to standards now enjoyed by the surrounding structures and (.2) the topography of the property being lakeshore, the addition of the garage to the front of the structure would reduce the costs of enlarging the house and at the same time tend to improve the aesthetics of the surrounding area. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Berg then told the Commission, Central Engineering Co. was seeking a .building permit for an additional building to their. existing- fac- ilities at 2930_ Anthony Lane which will require no variances . No plans for the addition had been reported to the City, when a temporary " permit was sought for an office..trailer to be maintained on the site until the new addition is built. This permit was: to expire in September and an extension applied for if the new addition was not started by that date. Al Goetsch of the engineering firm and Foster W. Dunwiddie of Miller- Dunwiddie, Architects , were present to discuss the site plans for the proposal with the Commission members . Mr. Goetsch said he anticipated the bids for the project to be taken in October. City staff had reviewed the plans and found conformance with all. City ordinances regarding setbacks but Mr. Berg had some questions regarding the adequacy of the parking proposed. Mr. Goetsch told him there are -3- presently 60 parking spaces provided for the 60 employees -of Central , 10 of whom are located off the site and the firm does not anticipate much increase in the number -of 'employees for the future. The addi- tion. wi-ll. provide 39 .parking . stalls with 8 more possible, according to Mr, . Dunwiddie. . A landscaping architect will draw up the land- scaping plans and . the signage, which- is sure to be .in keeping with the buildings., will be developed soon by. the firm, the architect promised. . The Chairman- suggested. Central might consider as a model the several new signs in the office park. Action on the Commission ' s motion of recommendation- regarding the. Central request , was . deferred until after the scheduled public hearing . was held. The public hearing on the proposed amendment to the• Blanske Addition plat for- the property bound by Silver Lake Road, Silver Lane and Pen- rod Lane was opened at 8:05 P.M. by the Chairman who read the notice of the -hearing which had gone out to all the affected property owners in the area, as listed in the agenda.. Bernard' Blanske, 3829 Foss Road, owner of the property, was present to explain that, to sell the existing house. on the property in question, it will be necessary for the subdivision- of . Lot 1 of the plat into.-Parcels A and B. As he had explained in his September 12th memorandum, Mr. Berg reiterated the hearing was required by • ordinance for an amendment of an existing plat as is required for consideration .of a new plat. Therefore, since the staff considered the action as procedur.eal, it recommends approval. He reported the subdivision had been reviewed by the City Attorney and told Mrs. Makowske adequate side yard setbacks will be maintained. No other persons were present to speak for or against the proposal and the public hearing was closed at 8 :12 P.M. Motion by Mr. Bowerman and seconded by Mr. Jones, .to recommend Council approval for the subdivision of the existing plat for. the Blanske property presently described as Lots 1, 2 and 3 , Block 1, Blanske Addition which will divide existing Lot 1 of the plat. into Parcel "A" described as Lot 1, Block 1, Blanske Addition, except the East 137. 80 feet of that part of said Lot 1, lying North of the North line of Lot 2 , and its extension West and Parcel "B" described as the East. 137.80 feet of that part of Lot 1, lying North of the North line of Lot 2 and its extension West, Block 1, Blanske Addition, finding that this action continues previous City discussions regarding developing buildable sites for the properties to the south. Motion carried unanimously. At 8 :20 P.M. Chairman Bjorklund opened .the public hearing to con- sider an ordinance amendment prepared by the .City Attorney at the direction of the Council to better define and permit the use of a caretakers residence in a mini-warehouse facility such as was approved • for the property on Foss Road owned by Bernard Blanske. -4- Mr. Bowerman said he approved..of . the., amendment itself . but objected to the exclusion - of children over 18 years of age living in the caretakers. residence,. since he knows . of many children older than that age .who . live with their parents while attending college, etc. and he felt the phraseology discriminated against them. Mr,. Jones and Mrs . Makowske were..opposed: to. the..-allowance of- children. under 18 in the caretakers residence because they do not believe children should be- permitted to' live- in a. Light Industrial district. Mrs. Makowske was concerned with the-.City permitting children to live in an area where trucks are driving in and out putting children, especially toddlers, in jeopardy. Mr. Blan.ske was still in attendance. and said he too objected to excluding older children .from the caretakers quarters,. - Although it is his intention to have .only . retired or disabled persons to provide the security he feels is necessary. for the mini.-warehouse facility, Mr. Blanske said he might, if .no one is found by next summer, use the quarters for himself and- he has .a 13 and a 23. year old and wouldn'.t want the eldest excluded from living there. There. was no one else present to .speak for or against the amendment and the public hearing was closed at 8 :37 P.M. Motion by Mr._- Bowerman and seconded. by Mr. Enrooth. to..report to the Council that -the Planning -Commi-ssion had...held the.. required public • hearing on the amendment . of Section 1, Subdivision 3..of 'Section 10 of the. zoning Ordinance to add.-Subsection 7 which-permits a dwell- ing unit .for use .as. a-.residence for a , caretaker for. a. mini-warehouse facility and- for which there was no opposition to the amendment per se but a change in the wording is recommended by the Planning Com- mission whereby the words "dependent children." are substituted for the words "children under the age of 18 years" in the amendment. Before the vote was taken, Mrs: Makowske said .she.; would not be able to vote for the..change or for .the amendment .because she would "feel remiss with an ordinance which might jeopardize the .safety of children" . Mr. Jones agreed saying he was concerned because the amendment applied not only to the Blanske property but to. any other similar facility which might be developed in the .City at. a. later date. He did not believe children should be raised in a commercial area and disagreed with Mr. Enrooth' s statement "If you -decide to exclude children, you're discriminating" by telling him such exclusions are the practice allover the metropolitan area. He said he. knew children could be excluded from duplexes where the owner is a resident and cited other: instances where exclusions are .permitted. He agreed with Mr. Enrooth, however., that the legal clarification of the point should besought by staff. Mr. Sopcinski believed .excluding children might also exclude a semi- disabled parent with children from seeking this type of part time • employment and .suggested.. the fact that the Blanske unit will have only one bedroom might limit. the number of residents who could live there. -5- Mrs. Makowske reminded- him the amendment does not specifically define the number of bedrooms .allowed in such facilities and thought the size of the units should probably be stipulated. She then offered an .amendment to. Mr. Bowerman' s motion which would put a period after the words "caretaker 's spouse" eliminating the reference to children. Her motion for the. amendment was seconded by Mr. Jones. Mr. -Bowerman said he could. not vote. for 'this amendment because, although he shares the concern for the health and .welfare of children, he does not believe such concern can be. legislated through an ordin- ance, or .an,.attempt should be made .to legislate the living conditions which exist on a piece of property. He did not want the potential for a job. of a caretaker to prohibit anyone with children living at home. Voting on the amendment: Aye: Makowske, Jones and Bjorklund. Nay: Sopcinski, Bowerman and Enrooth. Amendment not carried. Voting on the motion: Aye: Bowerman, Enrooth, Sopcinski and Bjorklund. • Nay: Makowske and Jones. Motion carried. Because of the strength of the opposition to the motion, Mr.. Bowerman suggested the following directions be given. Motion by Mr: Bowerman and .seconded byMr.- Bjorklund to request the portion of the minutes pertaining to the opposition to the children being. permitted to live in a mini-warehouse facility be read aloud to Council when the Commission representative is making hisreport on this subject. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Peterson arrived at 8 :50 P.M. just prior to the explanation by Mr. Berg for the delay in the sign ordinance being presented for Commission consideration. The meeting wasrecessed from 8 :50 P.M.- to 9 :00 P.M. when the Commission considered the request for a concept review of a barber shop proposed for the Hedlund property at 3909 Silver Lake Road. Craig S. Morris, Route #2 , Stacy, Minnesota, said he would like to • remodel the existing residence on the southernmost lot of the property governed by the Hedlund PUD for a barber-beauty shop and showed the -6- Commission members a site drawing .of the proposal including 9 • parking stalls . He already has.. an established business in the St. Anthony area with. 300 customers and most .of his..employees coming from the community. Though he will lease the property from .Mr. Hedlund, he has an option to. .buy. and "would certainly not leave his present location if. I wasn't .certain of staying" . The Health Depart- ment had. already inspected the buiiding .and .said. there is sufficient- water and. sewer service to .support . a beauty. salon but had told him ' of other improvements. he must make including sheetrocking the walls, installation..of, an energy .efficient: water heater. as well as sterili- zation and sanitation of. the building. Mr. Morris .intends to change the exteriorfacade of the building to either stucco. or rough cedar and will comply with any requirements for landscaping, desiring "to make .the property more attractive for both his customers and the community" . He plans to remove the existing garage on the property which is 'hn eyesore" which should leave more room for parking. Mr. Berg told the Commission there were several points regarding the P.U.D. which must .be clarified for this proposal. He mentioned he had been unable to get - a firm response from Mr. Ames as to whether he plans to proceed with his townhouse project to the north of the existing residence which leaves open the possibility that the property might revert to a commercial usage. The question of whether the requirement for the Letter of Credit applies in part or wholly to the development of this site had received differing 'intrepreta- tions from staff and it is not clear .whether the parking requirements for the commercial component of the P.U.D. apply .equally to the lot • in question. The Commission- members estimated at. least 12 parking spaces should be required to serve both the potential -customers and the employees of the shop. Kenneth Lee was present and said he proposes to .build a house directly east of the Hedlund site and .he. and Mr. Morris have reached an agreement concerning the screening between the. properties . Mr. Morris indicated he was also willing .to comply with other City requirements regarding the parking, landscaping and signage for the building as well as' lighting of the property at .night.. He showed a rough drawing of the sign he would .like to erect. The .question of whether this sign might constitute a .major portion..of the signage permitted the entire. commercial component of the P.U.D. was another point requiring clarification. The Chairman assured Mr. Morris that he "wants. him .to stay in the City" and suggested when he returns with a. formal application, he should include the stipulation that the garage will be removed as well as the addressing of the fighting he proposes as well as the parking he will provide, with 12 stalls suggested. For his. presentation. he advised him to have the site. plans for the proposal indicating the landscaping specifics as well as those for signage. He told him the signage at the Goodyear. Tire company across Silver Lake Road is an example of the type of signage which has been acceptable to the City in the past. • Mr. Morris thanked the Commission for -.the helpful suggestions they had given him and said he intends to improve the property so it will be a credit to the community. c -7- The Commission- next returned to.. the recommendation: regarding the Central Engineering proposal. Motion- .by Mr... Jones and seconded- by Mr.. Sopcinski to .recommend the Council grant a building permit for. .the .proposed. addition to the Central .Engineering Co. facilities, 2930. Anthony. Lane,. as presented in the site- plans by the .engineering firm' s representatives, provided the proposal meets all applicable. codes and ordinances.; and at the same time to recommend the Council grant- an-, extension of 90 days for the temporary permit for the. mobile. trailer office. Motion carried. unanimously-.. Mrs.. Makowske.-had not been present for the approval- .of the August 19th minutes. and .she requested the motion 'of approval .be amended to correct wording which she did not..believe. accurately,. reflects her actions during . the- August meeting. She requested that the word "suggestion" be substituted for "urging" on- Page 5.,. para. 4 , line. 4 which substitution was accepted by the Commission. Motion by Mrs - Makowske and seconded :by .Mr. Bjorklund to amend the previous motion of approval to approve,.. as corrected, the minutes for the Commission meeting held August 19 , 1980 . Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Berg said the City would probably. be willing to .pay $50 towards a Commission member' s attendance at- the regional- confer.ence on fin- ancing city projects in November and would consider future requests of this nature on. .a "case by . case" basis.. The Chairman said he believes the information derived. from this conference relating to financing of any possible redevelopment projects would prove in- valuable to the City and definitely thought someone should go. Motion. by Mr. Enrooth and seconded .by Mr. Peterson to adjourn the meeting at 10 :00 P.M. Motion carried. unanimously. Respectfully submitted , Helen Crowe Secretary •