Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPL MINUTES 11171981 Meeting Sheet 100219 I IIIIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII II III Box: 15 Folder. Document: VL MINUTES 1117198 8 r CITY OF ST. ANTHONY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES November 17 , 1981 The meeting was called to order by Doug Jones , Chairman Pro Tem, at 7 : 31 P.M. . Present for roll call: Enrooth, .Sopcinski., Makowske , Jones and Bowerman- at 7 :32 P.M. Absent: Peterson -and Bjorklund. Also present: Ron Berg, Administrative Assistant. The following corrections were madeto the minutes for the Commission meeting held October 20 , 1981 : Page 3 , para. 7 : Substitute "final" for "preliminary" in the fourth line. Page 4 , para. . 7 : Substitute "and plans should be made in December for interviews in January" for "for which inter- views may be held in December" in the third line . Motion by Mr. Jones and seconded by Mr. Sopcinski to approve as corrected the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting held October 20 , 1981. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Enrooth agreed to represent the Commission at the Council meeting scheduled for November 24th. Mr. Berg reiterated the information he had conveyed in his November 4th memorandum related to the City' s urging Minneapolis officials to -correct the proliferation of signage on the .Champion Auto Store on the southwest .corner of 37th Avenue and Stinson Boulevard, including substantial improvements to the building exterior promised for the future. Red Owl removed the truck advertising for the Country Store at Apache by the deadline set by the City for its removal , according to the Administrative Assistant. Mr. Peterson arrived at 7 :37 P.M. Negotiations with the proprietor of Joe' s Service Station on Kenzie Terrace have resulted in a promise that the abandoned bus across the street will be removed before 8 : 00 A.M. , November 20th , and if not, will be impounded by the City, Mr. Berg said . • He then recommended Commission members indicate , in writing, their interest in continuing their service on the Commission in 1982 . -2- Mrs . Makowske requested staff make reservations for her to attend the Planning and Zoning Institute to be held in Bloomington , December 10th and 11th. Mr. Enrooth . and Mr. Peterson will contact Mr. Berg before November 24th- to indicate their interest in attending, if there is funding available. At 7 : 47 P.M. , the Chairman Pro Tem opened the public hearing on the variance petition from Sid Johnson for the St . Anthony Court. He had delayed the hearing in anticipation of the arrival of the petitioner, who failed to appear during the- .meeting. Mr. Jones -read the notice of the hearing which had gone out to all property owners within 200 feet of the site., between 3909. and 4017 Silver Lake Road, for which the variance of 238 square feet per unit is requested. No one present reported failure to receive the notice nor objected to its contents . Mr. Berg reported the application fee of $25 had been paid and reiterated the problems with density which had arisen in connection With the townhome development and now necessitates a variance to the zoning ordinance requirements to be presented at a public hearing, as reported in his October 23rd .and November 13th memorandums . In his notices to the Council and the Commission, the Administrative Assistant had indicated that during the title search connected with the final platting of the Johnson site, the City Attorney had discovered a 10 foot easement along Silver Lake Road had been dedicated to Ramsey County by Gordon Hedlund in 1978 , with the dedication recorded on neither of the plats held by the City or the County. As an indica- tion of this , he pointed out that Ramsey County had, in 1981, requested such an easement be dedicated, which the City had denied because Mr. Johnson had, at that time , indicated in writing he foresaw a density problem for his proposed development with such an easement. The county has since confirmed they'. have no plans for use of the easement and. don ' t anticipate a need for it for expansion purposes in the future, according to Mr. Berg who recommends the requested variance be granted Mr. Johnson so he .can complete his construction of 25 units as proposed. When the question was raised whether Mr. Johnson knew of the easement held by the county, Mr. Berg said he was certain the developer had discovered its existence at approximately the same time as the City Attorney. He also confirmed that, with the variance, the St. Anthony Court will have a 31 foot front yard setback; there will need to be no change in the plans for driveways , and the 600 feet along Silver Lake Road will, in all likelihood, remain open space. Any effort to get the easement back from the county will be a lengthy process , Mr. Berg warned, andwould certainly interfere with the construction timetable for the project, since five units are partially up, with Council approval. Mr. Bjorklund arrived at 8 :01 P.M. Mrs . Makowske questioned whether the easement might be needed for cable T.V. installation but none have been scheduled to date , as far as Mr. Berg knows , and he also told her the reason the City might not have noted the 600 feet had been removed from the tax rolls was because Ramsey County does the City assessing in that area. He will • check to see if Mr. Hedlund might have also dedicated a similar ease- ment in front of the property to the south utilized by Craig and Co. � s -3- The Chairman Pro Tem outlined the procedure -to be followed for public input to Mrs. Marland Johnson., . the only other -,person present , telling her that although the proponent was not present, he believed his variance request had been adequately presented by staff. Mrs. John- son told the Commission members she lives directly behind the town- house project at 4008 Penrod Lane and hoped granting the variance would assure. that the existing path in front of the property along Silver Lake Road would be retained as a walkway forthe many pedestrians who use it. now to reach Apache. She would favor sidewalks for pedestrian safety in the area. Mr. Jones told her Ramsey. County holds 5 feet of open space in front of the Johnson property and he wondered if sidewalks could not be requested as a condition for granting the variance. Mr. . Bjorklund indicated he believes the City can attach- any condition it deems necessary to a .variance and the installation costs could be assessed to the property owners. At this point, Mr. Bowerman stated he believed "The Commission is becoming too lax regarding the requirement that petitioners should appear in person to present their requests" , citing Mr. Johnson' s absence and that .of Craig -Morris- the previous month when non-conformance with his development plans was discussed. The Commission member contended that "a valid public hearing cannot be held without the applicant for the variance being present to answer questions from Commission members and. the public regarding his petition" . At 8: 10 , Mr. Jones closed the .public hearing for. Commission action. Mr. Bjorklund stated he would like to see the easement returned to the private domain which will assure it can 't be used later by the county. He was not pleased to have to consider a variance for this proposal after the neighbors, many of whom have been actively involved in this property ' s development, had been promised- there would be no variances necessary. Mr. Peterson agreed with Mr. Bowerman that the matter should probably be tabled until the developer appears to justify the variance. Mr. Enrooth concurred saying he doesn' t believe an educated judgement can be made at a public hearing where the petitioner is not present. Mr. Johnson had indicated to him that he would be present for the hearing, Mr. Berg reported. Mr. Sopcinski was in. agreement that the .developer should be present so a record can be. made of his response to questions and recommendations related to his request, but the Commission member did not see the sidewalks as an issue, but rather, theproblem with the ten foot easement which creates a non-conforming density for the site. Mrs. Makowske: believed it was unfortunate Mr. Johnson was not present and agreed the Commission should probably table the request until he could present his application personally. Although he agrees it would probably be advantageous to the City to have the county retain the easement so signage , etc. , could be con- trolled, Mr. Jones sees it as "imperative to get sidewalks installed with the Johnson project because once the Hedlund tract is fully -4- developed, and it is economically feasible for the owner of several lots north of this site .to do so, Mr.. Blanske will probably be in with a request for approval of a .development similar. to Mr. Johnson 's and the City will be consistent in making sidewalks a condition for approval of that proposal as well" . Mr. Jones also believes sidewalks in these areas will prove to be the impetus for Twin City Federal and Cadwallder Realty to provide the same improvements on their properties. Mr. .-Bowerman said one of. the reasons he believes the Johnson petition should .be tabled is because the third condition set by ordinance for granting a variance had not been satisfactorily addressed by the petitioner. He also questioned whether the City could require the developer to build sidewalks on land owned by the county. Motion. by Mr. Bjorklund and seconded Mr. Bowerman to table action on the November 9 , 1981 application from Sid Johnson for a variance to the City Zoning Ordinance which requires 4 ,000 square feet of lot area per townhouse unit, which will permit Mr. Johnson to construct, as proposed, 25 townhome units on Lot 12 , Block 1 , Penrod Addition, because no proponent appeared to answer questions the Commission considers vital to a Commission recommendatkon . regarding the variance . Voting on the .Motion: Aye: Bjorklund, Bowerman, Enrooth, Sopcinski and Makowske. Nay: Jones . Motion to table carried. A motion by Mr. Bjorklund and seconded by. Mr. Bowerman to commend Mrs . Makowske and Mr. Enrooth for "the contribution they made to the community welfare by agreeing to run for a Council seat" was with- drawn when a less formal indication of Commission appreciation was accepted as more practical. . Mr. Berg requested Commission members to give special attention to the definitions and last portion of the sign ordinance-he had distri- buted that evening, so they will be prepared to make comments and recommend modifications they consider appropriate at the next meeting. By that time he anticipates receiving the reaction of the City Attorney and sign consultants who will have reviewed the ordinance as well as from Jim Gahagen of the Chamber of Commerce. One thing he had noted, while developing the proposed ordinance , Mr. Berg said , was that, "There ' s no such thing as a perfect sign ordinance" . And, he is certain the City will have to continue to react individually to some sign requests . However, he views the new standards as pro- viding a better basis for approving or rejecting proposed signage . Mr. Berg told Mr. Sopcinski street frontage is established in the new ordinance as criteria for signage for smaller- stores which occupy space . formerly tenanted by larger operations , with frontage projected for those stores who don' t front on the street. The dis- -5- cussion was concluded with an acknowledgement of the existence of non- conforming signage throughout the community. Motion by Mr. Peterson and seconded by Mr. Sopcinski to adjourn the meeting at 8: 50 ' P.M. Motion carried unanimously. Respectfully submitted, Helen Crowe Secretary