HomeMy WebLinkAboutPL MINUTES 07161985 ;s
Meeting Sheet
s
101850
;4
Box:21
Folder: PL MINUTES AND AGENDAS 1985
Document: PL MINUTES 07161985
i
;i
}
CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
July -16, 1985
1 The meeting was called to order by Chair Franzese at 7:33 P.M.
2
3 Present for roll call : Franzese, Bowerman, Jones, and Bjorklund.
4
5 Absent: Madden, Hansen, and Wagner.
6
7 Also present: David Childs, City Manager.
8
9 Motion by Commissioner Bjorklund and seconded by Commissioner Bowerman to approve
10 as submitted the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting held June 18, 1985.
11
12 Motion carried unanimously.
13
14 Commissioner Bowerman will report the minutes of the meeting to the Council at
15 their July 23rd meeting.
16
1 7 At 7:40 P.M. , the Chair opened the public hearing to consider the request from
18 Robert Olin for a conditional use permit to allow the operation of two tanning
• 19 beds in-the Abair Solution beauty shop to be operated by him and his wife, Jane,
20 at 2906 Pentagon Drive.
21
22 The Manager indicated the notice of the hearing had been published in the July 2nd
23 Bulletin and mailed to all property owners of record within 350 feet of the sub-
24 ject property. No one present reported failure to receive the notice or objected
25 to its content and Mr. Childs indicated he had received ,no calls either for or
26 against the proposal . As he had stated in his July 11th memorandum to the Com-
27 missioners, the Manager reiterated that this request was very similar to that
28 approved by the Council in June, 1982, for the tanning salon at Apache which
29 had been reported in the May 18 Commission and June 8, 1982 Council minutes,
30 copies of which he had attached to his memorandum. Staff recommendation was
y 31 that the Council grant the permit, Mr. Childs said.
32
33 Mr. . Olin explained that the beauty shop would include a nail artist booth and
34 eight hair cutting stations, as well as the two requested tanning beds which his
35 wife and he perceive could be expected to intially draw customers to the shop.
36 The shop owner also sai-d he believed offering the tanning services at this
37 shop would prevent customers from leaving the area to seek those services elsewhere.
38
39 Mrs. Olin arrived at this time and was introduced to the Commissioners by her
40 husband, who told them it was she, not he, who was the beautician.
41
42 The petitioner then indicated the couple had severed their association with the
43 Great Basics for Hair shop located in the basement of- the Country Club Market
44 building further up on Silver Lake Road and the shop owner told the Commissioners
• 45 he and his wife are required.-to wait 90 days before opening another shop and
46 that period would be up by August 1st when they hope to be able to open in the
47 St. Anthony Shopping Center.
-2-
1 The shop would probably be open.Monday through Saturday, from 8.:30.. A.M. to 9:00 .
• 2 or 9:30 P.M. , when his wife cuts her last head of hair, Mr. Olin said, and he
3 indicated that, if the tanning beds are as successful as..expected in. the new
4 location, he and his wife would want to be able to stay open on Sundays as well
5 during the tanning season, which normally- runs between December and June.
6 However, the couple would not expect the tanning business would ever provide
7 more than a supplementary income for the business and .two beds would probably
8 suffice, Mrs. Olin said, but, at the same time, the beautician indicated, she
9 recognized most beauty shop customers had become accustomed to having that type
10 of service available along with other beauty services, - and it might become
1]_ necessary to provide those services at least until . a regular clientele can
12 be built up on the new location.
13
14 There was no one present to speak against the permit .and the hearing was closed
15 at 7:50 P.M. for Commission -consideration.
16
17 Before a motion was made, Mr. Olin countered any- concerns about the safety of
18 the tanning facility by saying all literatur.e .he had seen demonstrated that the
19 rays emanating from the machines are considered ,to be safer than those experienced
20 by most sun bathers.
21
22 Commissioner Bowerman suggested that, if the Commission's 1982 motion were to
23 be used as a model for the motion that evening, the wording -,be modified to
24 indicate that the tanning facility would only be a supplementary service offered
25 in a beauty shop.
26
•
27 Motion by Commissioner 'Bjorklund and seconded by Commissioner Bowerman to rec-
28 ommend the Council �grant' a -condi-tional use permit to Robert W. Olin, 742
29 Buchanan Street N.E. , Minneapolis, under the City- ordinance .amendment which
30 would allow the operation of body sun tanning facilft,ies in conjunction with the
31 operation of the Hair 'Solution Beauty Shop at 2906* Pentagon Drive,. subject to
32 annual review of the permit and .to the facility meeting all applicable City,
33 State, and Federal codes.
34
35 In recommending .approval ,' the Planning Commission finds that:.
36
37 1 . No one appeared at the Commission hearing or contacted staff prior to the
38 hearing to object to the permit;
39
40 2. The proposed service seems to fit in with other types of service in that
41 commercial district; and
42
43 3. No problems or complaints aboutsimilar operations in St. Anthony have been
44 reported.
45
46 Motion carried unanimously.
47
48 The Chair read that portion of Section 330:65 of the City Ordinance related to the
49 procedure to be followed for -the final platting of the Johnson property which
50 stated that: "The Planning Commission at its discretion may submit a report to
51 the Council . " The copy of that ordinance section had been included in the agenda
S2 packet along with a -copy of the final plat .and that portion of the Commission's
• 53 February 19, 1985 minutes which reported .their� recommendations to the Council
54 related to the preliminary platting of the redevelopment project. Mr. Childs
55 drew the Commissioner's attention -to the fact that the developer had identified
-3-
1 all utility easements in the final document,. just as they had, requested, and he
• 2 con f4 that the City would now have access to, but not ownership of, those
3 easements.
4
5 Commissioner Jones indicated he believed the existing heavy overhead utility
5 lines servicing that property would detract .from the -appearance and value of the
7 homes to be built there. It was his contention that these 'l,ines and the lines
if 8 servicing the individual `lots should._ be placed underground. He was, referred to
9 page 9 of the February Commission minutes which reported the developer 's re-
10 sponse to the same suggestion from Commissioner Hansen, "that the lines are
11 already in on Edward and the -homeowners would have the option of having service
12 run underground to their property at a higher charge" .
13
14 The Manager said- when he had put the same, question to-'the' NSP Representative,
15 he had been told changing, those lines wou'ld.just not be cost effective. Mr.
16 Childs said the NSP posit-ion-,-had seemed reasonable at that time because the same
17 representative had 'been most .cooperattve in providing underground lines to the
18 Hertog property, which is also being redeveloped. When -Commissioner Jones
19 questioned whether such heavy- duty lines would now be necessary since both
20 florist businesses are gone, the Manager speculated that those lines also serviced
21 the area of 33rd Avenue N.E. , and Commissioner Bjorklund told Commissioner Jones,
22 "florist shops don't normally -use a lot of electricity".
23
24 Commissioner Jones said he found such heavy overhead lines in front of residences
25 to be "obnoxious and ludicrous in a new development and said he perceived it
26 should be the City' s- responsibility to; protect- future buyers of those lots from
•
27 having their properties downgraded' in this manner. He also .pointed out the
28 potential danger to a child if one of those heavy lines is knocked down in the
29 type of storm that area experienced' a.year ago: The Commissioner was also
30 certain the City's Comprehensive Plan- called for underground service to all new
31 projects.
32
33 The Chair commented -that the buyers who had already been found for two of the
34 Johnson lots must have seen -the high wires which would run in front of their
35 homes before they agreed to purchase that property, but she indicated she per-
36 ceived Commissioner Jones might have a point about the potential for danger
37 from a falling wire.
38
39 Commissioner Bjorklund said he certainly agreed with Commissioner Jones that it
40 would be preferable not to have those heavy wires running in front of the project,
41 especially since he has seen -how new developments are built in other municipalities.
42 However, he wondered if the Johnson project could be considered a "big project"
43 as compared to the ones he was referring to. Commissioner Bjorklund indicated
44 he perceived it might be a real financial burden to force the developer to pay
45 for the cost of putting the existing lines underground if NSP refuses to do so.
46 . Commissioner Jones wondered' if that cost would be quite so heavy if the cost
47 of the lots were taken into consideration. Mr. Childs said he would contact the
48 utility company again.
49
50 Motion by Commissioner Bjorklund and seconded by Commissioner Bowerman to
51 recommend Council approval of the final platting for Johnson Manor, a nine lot
• 52 and two outlots subdivision between 33rd and 34th Avenues N.E. , east of Edward
53 Street, as presented in the final plat for the project,.. at the same time mention-
54 ing that, although there. was significant concern expres`sed- during the Commission
55 consideration that all utility lines which serviced the project should be
`f
-4-
1 placed underground as recommended in the City's Comprehensive Plan, the final
• 2 Commission conclusion had been that requiring that might impose too great
3 a hardship on the developer.
4
5 In recommending approval of the final platting, the Commission finds that:
6
7 1 . Both the Commission and Council had held public hearings on the preliminary
8 platting;
9
10 2• No one appeared at either hearing to object to the platting and there were a
11 number of neighbors who did testify in favor of the proposed plat and project
12 during the Commission' s May 18, 1985 hearing;
13
14 3. The subject plat generally conforms to. municipal standards and where lots
15 are smaller than required, many similar lots with small frontages,. depths,
16 and land area, have been- platted and developed in the adjacent locality; and
17
18 4. The final platting specifically identifies the utility easements to which
19 the City is granted access, which was a concern .of the Planning Commission.
20
21 Before the vote on the motion was taken, Commissioner Jones offered an amendment
22 to the motion comments related to the provision of" underground utilities to the
23 project which would "require all utility lines to the project and to each lot,
24 including cable., electric, and telephone, 'to be placed underground in conformance
25 with Item #4 of the Section on Public Utility/Service Policy in the City Com-
26 prehensive Plan" which calls for the "promotion of underground utility lines
27 for all new or redeveloped -projects. " The amendment was accepted by both the
28 maker and second of the mot ion, which then passed unanimously.
29
30 Chair Franzese said that when Commissioner Madden had called to let her know he
31 would not be in attendance that evening, he had asked- her to draw the Com-
32 missioners' attention to the City Attorney's direction related to placing
33 conditions on variances which were reported on page 4 of the minutes for the
34 Council ' s June 25th meeting, which Commissioner Madden had attended as the
35 Commission's representative.
36
37 Motion by Commissioner Jones and seconded by Commissioner Bowerman to adjourn
38 the meeting at 8:30 P.M.
39
40 Motion carried unanimously.
41
. 42
43
44 Respectfully submitted,
45
46 Helen Crowe, Secretary
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55