HomeMy WebLinkAboutPL MINUTES 11191985 Meeting Sheet
IIIIII VIII II
III VIII VIII VIIIIIIIIIII
ioiani
Box:21
Folder: PL MINUTES AND AGENDAS 1985
Document: PL MINUTES 11191985
CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
November 19, 1985
1 The meeting was called to order by Chair Franzese at 7:32 P.M.
2
3 Present for roll call : Bowerman, Hansen, Franzese, Bjorklund, and Wagner.
4
5 Absent: Jones and Madden.
6
7 Also present: David Childs, City Manager (_arrived at 7:40 P.M. ) .
8 -
9 During the consideration of the October 15th Commission minutes, both Commissioners
10 Bjorklund and Hansen indicated desires that their concerns about the number of
11 Nativity Church parishioners who compete"for, park::ing ,space!,.,withopersons attending__
12 official school and City functions in the Park View building, be more emphatically
13 stated in the minutes.
14
15 Motion by Commissioner Bjorklund and seconded by- Commissioner Hansen to approve the
16 minutes of the Planning Commission meeting held October 15, 1985, with the follow-
17 i ng changes:
18
19 Page 1 , line 24: Substitute "Commissioner" for "Commission
• 20
21 Page 2, line 23: Substitute "where" for "from" at the end of the sentence.
22
23 Page 2, lines 29-34: Strike "along" at the end of line 29 and substitute the
24 following for the remainder of the paragraph, "in the new
25 parking lot would encourage parishioners to park across the
26 street where they could avoid having to cross against the
2 7 Silver Lake Road traffic. Some Commissioners had expressed
28 strong concerns about the congestion in the Park View parking
29 lots where Nativity parishioners compete with those attending
30 the large number of activities, including official City
31 meetings, going on in that building".
32
33 Motion carried unanimously.
34
35 Commissioner Bowerman said ,as far as he knew he would be able to report the minutes
36 to the Council at their November 26th meeting. Commissioner Hansen said he would
37 take Commissioner Bowerman' s place if he couldn't make it.
38
39 Mr. Childs arrived at 7:40 P.M. , just as the Chair opened the hearing to consider
40 the petition from the St. Anthony National Bank for a sign variance which would
41 allow an Instant Cash sign to be placed on the 2-1/2 foot brick base they had
42 previously installed a foot and a half away from the front of the bank at 2401
43 Lowry Avenue N.E. , not realizing they would. need a variance to do so.
44 45 The notice of the hearing had been published in the November 5, 1985 Bulletin and
45 mailed to all property owners of record within 200 feet of the subject property.
UIn his overview of the matters the Commission would be handling that evening,
Mr. Childs had -indicated staff had received no calls either for or against the
49 variance and staff had no objections to the 9 square foot sign the bank was requesting.
-2-
1 No one present reported failure to receive the notice or objected to its content
2 and the only person present to speak to the issue was Lon Helgemo-, representing the
3 bank.
4
5 The Manager told Chair Franzese the City tries to avoid setting signage precedents
6 but he perceived an example of a similar situation would be when the City granted
7 a second variance to the original variance for a large free standing sign which
8 permitted the addition of the message "24 Hour Teller Service" to the existing
9 Twin City Federal Savings and Loan Association sign in front of the bank's build-
10 ing at 3819 Silver Lake Road. Mr. Childs also verified that the St. Anthony
11 National Bank already had a free standing identification sign, as well as the sign
12 bn their- building, but indicated the requested sign would be much smaller than the
13 TCF sign. Commissioner Bowerman suggested the bank might be able to add the
14 same message to their existing monument sign.
15
16 Mr. Helgemo defended the bank' s request for additional signage by saying this sign
17 had not been requested as a service for the bank's regular customers, but rather,
18 to identify to other Cirrus bank card holders that an instant cash machine had been
19 provided for their convenience in the bank lobby. He then explained that Cirrus
20 was the clearing house for handling a nationwide network of instant cash machine
21 transactions.
22
23 The hearing was closed at 7:47 P.M. for a Commission discussion of the request
24 and the recommendation which would be forwarded to the Council .
25
26 Commissioner Bowerman indicated he perceived ATM's (automatic teller machines)
27 were a fairly common type of installation all over the area. His concern was
28 that, since the City had already permitted the bank to have one free standing
29 sign identifying this as a banking institution, to permit a second sign of the same
30 type to identifyan ATM service within the building might establish -a precedent
31 the City might not want to follow if other public service installations like
32 grocery retailers, decided to request additional signage to identify the cash
33 machines they also had provided in their own facilities .
34
35 Commissioner Bjorklund agreed the City might be opening the way for other financial
36 institutions like Midwest Federal Savings and Loan in Apache to request additional
37 signage to let people know they also have ATM's . He wondered if the petitioners
38 couldn't get the message told somewhere on the building if they hadn't used up
39 all the signage space allocated to them in the ordinance.
40
41 Commissioner Hansen disagreed that granting such a sign to a bank whose business
42 is exclusively money transactions would open the way for a Town and Country or a
43 Kentucky Fried Chicken, who deal in food, to expect similar signage. He per-
44 ceived the existing market made it essential for the bank to provide the instant
45 cash machine service, if they want' to compete, and he saw no problem with granting
46 a variance which would allow them to do so.
47
48 Commissioner Wagner said he perceived the service the bank would be offering was
49 geared to the whole community, and not exclusively to its own customers . He
50 pointed out that the requested sign would be very unobtrusive and would not be
51 harmful to the aesthetics of the bank building.
52
53 Commissioner Bjorklund recalled that the Planning Commission had recommended
54 against the additional logos on the Midwest Federal building and he indicated he
55 perceived that to permit the extra signage for the bank would give them more
56 signage than even Apache Plaza is permitted.
-3-
1 Mr. Childs said he was not acting as a spokesman for the bank' s position, but
2 indicated he perceived there might be a difference between granting a sign for a
3 building which had no lit signs on. it, and for a grocery store, which already has
4 big red letters lit up to advertise their business. He said he understood the
5 bank had requested only a sign which architecturally would be of such a size that
6 it could be positioned close to the building where it would be the least detri-
7 mental to the overall appearance of the bank itself. Mr. Childs said he perceived
g the bank's thinking had been that the City had already allowed TCF a much larger
9 sign to advertise the availability of. a 24 hour instant cash machine inside the
10 building, and to the Manager's way of thinking, the entire Midwest'Federal building
11 could be perceived to be a sign in itself which presented its own signage type
12 image just by its appearance (-tree shape) . The Manager also indicated he perceived
13 the bank had not tried to create an image like a McDonalds or Kentucky Fried .
14 Chicken for itself, but instead, had designed a sign they believed would fit
15 well into that neighborhood.
16
17 Commissioner Bjorklund told the Manager his comments, especially about the signage
18 image of Midwest Federal , which is uncommon for other financial institutions in
19 the City, had caused him to make a complete turnaround in his thinking related
20 to the requested signage.
21
22 Mr. Helgemo -responded to the presumption that instant cash service had become a
23 common part of the financial service all banks now offer, by saying not all net-
24 works are connected to Cirrus and the requested sign would be necessary to let
25 others than the bank's regular customers, who would know, that -their Cirrus bank
26 cards could be used at St. Anthony National Bank's automatic teller machine.
•
27 The bank representative also stated that; considering what it costs to install
28 one of these signs,- he would doubt the City would see too many machines like it
29 popping up all over St. Anthony.
30
31 Commissioner Bowerman said he could appreciate both sides of the issue and indica-
32 ted his own impulses towards a decision were divided 50/50, because he certainly
33 recognized that the bank was an asset to the City because of the way they had
34 conducted business- and cooperated with the City over the years. However, the
35 Commissioner added, he still had not been convinced that, by granting the request,
36 a precedent might be established which could cause a loss of control over the
37 amenities of signage the City might want to retain for the new developments being
38 considered now, just. a short distance away down Kenzie Terrace. He was still
39 concerned that the practice. of permitting second free standing signs would be
40 established and, Commissioner Bowerman commented, he .did not perceive it to be
41 beyond the realm of reality that there might be a merchant like Lunds, who would
42 be willing to make the required investment in an ATM machine and thus request a
43 sim`il-ar 'sa'gn,.,ieCommissioner Wagner indicated that he perceived that a sign like the
44 bank is requesting, which is very low and recessed far back on the property, almost
45 on the building itself, could never be equated with a street sign.
46
47 Commissioner Bjorklund indicated he now had been convinced that there had been
4 g similar requests from other financial lending institutions in the City which had
49 been granted, and he said that although he disliked approving what could be con-
50 sidered as a precedent setting variance, , he saw there might be a possibility of
51 couching the language of a recommendation for approval in such a way that the
52 uniqueness of the circumstances surrounding this particular sign could be brought
53 out especially because the resultant sign would be so inoffensive as to its height
54 and its location on the property.
55
-4-
1 Chair Franzese indicated she shared his concerns about setting a precedent, but
• 2 also agreed with Commissioner Bjorklund that .this was a case where similar businesses
3 had to be treated equally. She was however, concerned whether the question related
4 to hardship could be answered affirmatively by the applicant and Commissioner
5 Bjorklund stated that he perceived that hardship had already been acknowledged
6 when the TCF sign was allowed.
7
8 Motion by Commissioner Bjorklund and seconded by Commissioner Wagner to recommend
9 that the Council grant the St. Anthony National Bank, 2401 Lowry Avenue N..E. , the
10 variance to the City Sign Ordinance which would allow them to erect the 9 square
11 foot free standing, monument-type sign they proposed at the northeast corner of
12 their bank building which would carry the words "Instant Cash (,Cirrus)" on it,
13 as illustrated in the sketch indluded in the November 19th Commission agenda.
14 packet (to be initialed by the Chair) .
15
16 In recommending the variance be granted, the Planning Commission finds that:
17
18 1 . No objections to the sign -had been expressed at either the Commission hearing
19 or to staff prior to the hearing;
20
21 2. The sign would be sited in an inoffensive, recessed location next to the bank
22 entrance and not adjacent to the street, and would be generally small in size;
23
24 3. Precedents had already been established for granting similar variances to
25 other lending institutions in the City, namely, Twin City Federal and Midwest
26 Federal Savings and Loan Associations; and
• 27
28 4. The three questions required to be answered affirmati-vely by the petitioner
29 had been done so in general terms by this applicant.
30
31 Before the vote was taken, Commissioner Bowerman indicated that he was impelled
32 to speak against the motion in spite of his own mixed feelings, because he con-
33 tinued to perceive (1 ) that the City was in a major redevelopment phase of the
34 Kenzie Terrace area which, in his own opinion, could be adversely affected by the
35 precedent being set, and (2) that some difference could be perceived in the re- '
36 lationships between the precedent set for this bank, which is more involved with a
37 residential setting, as opposed to a more commercially oriented, Silver Lake Road
38 location for the Twin City Federal facility, across from Apache Plaza, Hardees,
39 Goodyear, and NAPA Parts. On the other hand; Commissioner Bowerman indicated, he
40 recognized the positive side of the issue would be that, by granting the variance,
41 the City would be providing a good customer service for the community.
42
43 Commissioner Bjorklund indicated that, if it weren't for the fact that the
44 St. Anthony National Bank sign would. be -so inoffensive, as compared to the TCF
45 sign, he might be inclimed to agree with Commissioner Bower.man' s conclusions.
46
47 Chair Franzese said that, because the sign would be so "conservatively understated",
48 she would be inclined to vote for the variance.
49
50 Commissioner Wagner agreed, saying ,he`believed the bank's community service should
51 outweigh the negatives in the proposal .
52
53 Voting on the motion:
54
55 Aye: Bjorklund, Wagner, Hansen, and Franzese.
-5-
1 Nay: Bowerman.
2
3 Motion carried.
4
5 At 8:01 P.M. , the Chair opened the hearing to consider a petition from the Nativity
6 Lutheran Church, 3312 Silver Lake Road, r foa conditional use permit in an R-1 ,
7 single family residential district, to construct the addition they proposed on
8 the west side of the church-. and to expand their parking facilities by removing
9 the house at the northeast corner of 33rd Avenue N.E. and Silver Lake Road and,
'10 in its place, constructing 38 parking spaces to=,accommodate=additional--,parking�ci+-
11 the facility.
12
13 The notice of the hearing had been published in the November 5, 1985 Bulletin and
14 mailed to all property owners of record within 350 feet of the subject property.
15 No present reported failure to receive the notice or objected to its content.
16
17 The request had been given a concept review by the Commission at their October
18 meeting and the Manager reiterated that -thO,.Ci,ty would be happy to see the church
19 would be providing the congregation-,vwith more parking on the east side of the
20 building because there had always been a concern about the foot traffic between
21 the church and the Community Center parking -lot, which many Nativity parishioners
22 preferred to the parking available to them on the other side of the church.
23
24 As had been stated at the October discussion, Mr. Childs reiterated that the original
25 plans for an addition on the west side of the church had been redrawn a little
26 farther south to meet the concerns about the proximity'of: the addition to his
27 property which had been expressed by Richard Porter, the church's closest neighbor,
28 at 3329 Belden Drive, who was also in attendance that evening. The Manager
29 indicated he hoped the unidentified neighbor who had called staff to indicate she
30 didn't like the idea of having a .parking lot located so close to her home, was
31 present to share her concerns with the church officials that evening. These had
32 been the only contacts with adjacent property owners that the City had up to this
33 evening, Mr. Childs said.
34
35 The revised plans for the expansion and parking projects were presented by John
36 Hensel , Chairman of the church Building Committee, Stan Gordon, President of the
37 Nativity congregation; Richard Carlson, a member of the Building Committee; and
38 Paul Erickson, the architect for the project.
39
40 Mr. Hensel indicated the church had been actively working for the last two or
41 three years to plan a project which would address the needs Nativity had exper
42 ienced with a very active and vital congregation, which in the last five years had
43 resulted in a real vitality in growth. With the growth in the congregation numbers,
44 especially in young f amilies, 'the Building Chairman said, the church officials
45 had realized the need to address not only the age of the church building itself,
46 but also the necessity to expand the programs for pre-school and older youth
47 groups. Mr. Hensel said the new parking lot would not only expand the existing
48 parking capability to meet the congregation increase, but would also provide safe
49 access to the first floor level , which is offered on a limited basis now, where
50 lighting and security are preceived to be better. Another important part of the
51 project, the Nativity spokesman said, would be the handicapped elevator access in
52 the addition on the west side, which had been moved back away from Mr. Porter's
• 53 residence to .meet his concerns about encroachment.
54
55 The architect answered questions related to the updated site, building, and eleva-
56 tion plans for the project which, he said, would maintain the required setbacks
57 all around the building and would retain the front door on Silver Lake Road.
-6_
1 He said the provision of brick and windows in the addition would give a sense of
2 warmth to the building and_an aesthetic view from the adjacent resident's property.
3
4 Chair Franzese was shown on the grading plans for the project that there was only
5 a four foot slope between the church property and the land acquired for the parking
6 lot: The architect pointed out how both the existing concrete and new bituminous
7 curbing, along with the crown on the new driveway, would prevent drainage of
8 surface water towards-:the closest property to the west. The Commissioners were
9 also told that the mechanical engineer had determined an 8 inch underground pipe
10 would be adequate to carry the water flow to the manhole in the west parking lot.
11 It was also pointed out that the down spouts, which would direct the rainfall
12 onto the grade and upgraded roof drains, had been designed to take the storm water
13 inside the building, and then to spill it out onto the parking lot, with all
14 improvements intended to direct the storm water to appropriate places and not to
15 cause erosion on the adjacent residential property, Mr. Hensel added. The Building
16 Chairman also said property controls would be installed in any spots where there
17 might be a possibility of erosion during construction, particularly on the west
18 side near Mr. Porter's home.
19
20 Mr. and Mrs. James McNulty, whose home is just west of the proposed parking lot
21 at 2921 - 34th Avenue N.E. , participated in the discussion of the church's plans .
22 Mr. McNulty indicated that, although he had told church representatives he would
23 not oppose their expansion plans, he still had some real concerns about drainage,
24 snow removal , and storage, and a buffer to shield his property from the parking
25 lot activities. He questioned whether six inches between the grade and the top of
26 the curb would be adequate to prevent storm water from flowing onto his property
• 27 and indicated he perceived the church would find in the long run, that concrete
28 curbings would be a* better investment.
29
30 Mr. Carlson told him that bituminous met all the standards required by the City
31 up to now and assured Mr. McNulty that he wouldn't get any drainage, since the
32 grade would be slanted to send the water to the center, and not to the edge of the
33 lot. Mr. Hensel told Mr. McNulty the church would be willing to build a six foot
34 fence between the lot and his property if that was what he perceived was needed to
35 provide him privacy on his deck and to prevent the headlights parked in the lot
36 from shining into -the McNulty' s bedrooms on the east side of their home. Mr.
37 McNulty said he doubted any church functions would last longer than their normal
38 bedtime.
39
40 Two property owners who live directly across 33rd Avenue from the proposed parking
41 lot, William McPherson, 3220 Silver Lake Road, and Lillian 'Koch, 2920 - 33rd
42 Avenue N.E. , were present to discuss their own concerns about the project.
43 Mr. McPherson indicated he had no objections to the parking lot itself, but had
44 hoped the exit wouldn 't be onto 33rd. He was also interested in what type of
45 landscaping the church planned around the lot, as was -Mrs. Koch, who also stated
46 she foresaw a problem backing out of her own driveway when the parking lot was
47 being used. She also was interested in_ learning just how having a parking lot
48 across the street would affect her property values.
49
50 Mr. Porter reiterated that he had no general objections to the proposed project,
51 but said he did have some specific concerns about drainage, which had been
52 addressed earlier in the evening. He said, with a 24 foot difference in grade
• 53 between his basement and the parking lot, he was concerned that the drainage plans
54 might not work if the manhole couldn 't handle a heavy downpour or is frozen up,
55 as often happened in the spring.
-7-
1 Mr. Porter indicated further, that poor maintenance of the grounds, especially the
2 church' s failure to remove the leaves before they blew into his yard and less than
3 perfect snow removal also concerned him. He said he would have no objection if
4 the existing soft, but adequate lighting were retained in the back parking lot,
5 but warned that he would not tolerate bright spotlights .
6
7 Mr. Porter reported that after a discussion with Nativity's Pastor Hoffman. the
8 previous week, the practice of ringing the church bells 20 times every day at noon
9 and at 6:00 P.M. had stopped. However, he said he understood the church policy on
10 the bells was being reviewed and, Mr. Porter said, hoped the church would continue
11 to ring the bells for only church functions, and not for what he perceived had
12 been reasons -not directly related to normal church functions . Mr. Porter told the
13 Commissioners he had measured the sound of the bells and found, from his home,
14 they measured 97 decibels every time the bell was rung, which, Mr. Porter added,
15 would be unacceptable to OSHA on some job sites. The complainant said he was
16 prepared to go throughout the neighborhood with a petition against non-function
17 ringing of the bell , if the practice were resumed.
18
19 When asked by Commissioner Bjorklund whether he perceived a 10 inch pipe would
20 be better to prevent future flooding of his property, Mr-. Porter told the Com-
21 missioner he was not a hydraulic engineer, and couldn't say exactly what size of
22 pipe would be needed to keep the manhole from overflowing. He told Chair Franzese
23 he had never been flooded from the church property in his 30 years there, but
24 just wanted that eventuality considered during the planning stages, rather than
25 after his basement gets flooded, which might force him to sue the church for the
26 damages.
27
•
28 When Commissioner Rjorklund commented that the City wouldn't want to grant a
29 variance for a project which had the potential of harming his property, Mr. Carlson
30 responded by saying the church was not seeking -any variances for their expansion
31 plans. He told Mr. Porter he would anticipate no further flooding of the manhole
32 since the church had hired a company to flush it out and, in his own judgement,
33 the Building . Committee member said, the existing pipe should be large enough to
34 handle all the future storm water which flows through the parking lot. Mr.
35 Carlson also told Mr. McNulty he believed he could give the church' s assurance
36 that none of the neighbors ' properties would ever be harmed by snow dumped from
37 parking lot cleaning.
38
39 Mr. Erickson said landscaping had not been included in the construction contract
40 but that the church planned to do that work itself. Mr: Hensel said he understood
41 the church committee members who had talked to Mr. McNulty had agreed that a
42 barrier acceptable to him would be constructed by the church between his property
43 and the new parking lot:*and the Building Chairman assured him the' church .had the
44 money in the budget for a six foot fence, if that is what the neighbor wants .
45 Mr. Childs said a fence of that height would meet the ordinance requirements, but
46 the ordinance itself does not mandate such a buffer between the church and adjoin-
47 ing properties. The Commission, however, could make the fence one of the conditions
48 under which the permit is granted, he added. Mr. McNulty did not indicate he
49 wanted the church to do anything with the large overhanging silver maple tree on
50 the acquired property even though Commissioner Bjorklund had indicated that could
51 also be a condition for the permit.
52
• 53 Mr. Erickson indicated that the construction budget provided concrete curbing
54 wherever there was now concrete and the same with bituminous, but not all concrete
55 curbing. Mr. Hensel said the church had no problems with deterioration with the _
56 curbs they have now.
—8—.
1 The Building Chairman pointed out the hazards of having a driveway off Silver Lake
2 Road which had prompted the church planners to provide for an exit off 33rd Avenue
3 instead. Commissioner Hansen suggested, as he had at the October Commission
4 meeting, that the driveway be built as far away from the Silver Lake Road inter-
5 section as possible to avoid problems for drivers -turning left and he asked if any
6 thought had been given to allowing only right hand turns towards the west.
7 Mr. Hensel indicated he liked that suggestion very much because that would keep
8 the driveway from having to be built too close to the west property line where
9 it could cause a problem with water runoff onto the neighbor's yard. The church
10 spokesman also told Mrs . Koch there would be 38 parking stalls provided in the new
11 lot and he certainly hoped the parishioners would make- full use of them all .
12 With 'the 41 parking stalls on the north side and 66 in the west parking area,
13 there would now be a total of 145 parking places -to serve a church seating capacity
14 of 510. Mr. Hensel also told Mrs. Koch he would have no way of assessing the
15 impact a parking lot might have on the resale value of the homes across the street.
16
17 Mrs. Koch indicated she perceived requiring only right hand turns from the parking
18 lot would make it much easier for her to- back out of her own driveway and go
19 towards Silver Lake Road. Mr. Childs said the City could probably enforce the
20 sign if the church wanted to have it installed.
21
22 Mr. Porter said one of his major complaints about the church 's maintenance of its
23 property centered on the fact that there is no effort made to rake up the leaves
24 on the church property and they all end up on his yard. He told Mr. Carlson he
25 believed it was the responsibility of the church to dispose of any leaves on its
26 property whether or not they came from their own trees .
• 27 .
28 Mr. McNulty said he' was not too concerned about the leaves from the trees next door
29 getting into his roof gutters because he intended to enclose those gutters anyway.
30 However, he said, the provision of screening, between the property was very important
31 to him,- as he had indicated to the church representatives who had come to see him,
32 and Mr. McNulty said, he would like to have the agreement regarding the fence
33 included in the approval 'of the permit. Mr. Porter indicated he perceived that
34 would be a good idea because when he had agreed to the parking lot being installed
35 next to him 30 years agog he had also been promised all sorts of landscaping which,
36 he said, had never happened. In regard to the durability of the bituminous already
37 on the church property, Mr. Porter indicated that some of the curbing on his side
38 of the parking lot had deteriorated and needed to be replaced. He also referred
39 to Mrs. Koch ' s question about the -impact of a parking lot on adjoining land values
40 by saying .herihad letters from three different reputable Northeast realtors telling
41 him that the proximity of his property to a parking lot did adversely affect the
42 value of that property.
43
44 Mr. Hensel said the church would not be arguing the point about installinga fence
45 between the parking lot and Mr. McNulty' s property during the construction period.
46 Mr. Erickson said he would be willing to work out a landscaping plan with the
47 neighbor which could be dated and submitted for Planning Commission approval .
48
49 Mr. Childs told Mrs . Koch there would be approximately a 25 foot setback from the
50 edge of the parking lot which would be planted with grass. When she expressed a
51 concern about the use of the parking lot by others than Nativity Church members,
52 Mr. Carlson told her it probably would be a good idea for the church to post the
• 53 area as private property, as Commissioner Wagner had suggested, to protect the
54 church from incurring a liability if a "park and drive" situation shou Td evolve.
55
-9-
1 The hearing was recessed at 9:20 P.M. and reconvened at 9:30 P.M. for the Com-
2 mission development of a recommendation to the Council .
3
4 Motion by Commissioner Bjorklund and seconded by Commissioner Wagner to recommend
5 the Council grant the request from Nativity Lutheran Church for a conditional use
6 permit in an R-1 , single family residential district, which would allow the con-
7 struction of the proposed addition on the west side of the existing church
8 building at 3312 Silver Lake Road, and the expansion of their parking facilities
9 onto the property which had been acquired for that purpose on the corner of Silver
10 Lake Road and 33rd Avenue N.E. , as presented- in the building, site, and parking
11 plans for the project which had been included in the November 19, 1985 Planning
12 Commission agenda packet, finding that the petitioners had affirmed that the follow-
13 ing conditions required by Minnesota statutes and City ordinances to be satisfied
14 before a conditional use permit can be authorized had been satisfied:
- 15
16 1 . The proposed conditional use is one of the conditional uses specifically listed
17 for the zoning district in which it is located;
18
19 2. The proposed conditional use is necessary or desirable at the above location to
20 provide a service or a facility which is in the interest of the public con-
21 venience and will contribute to the general welfare of the neighborhood or
22 community; and
23
24 3. The proposed conditional use will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or
25 general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity or injurious
26 - to property values or improvements in the vicinity, as long as the following
2 7 conditions, attached as apart of this motion are met:
28
29 a. that a landscaping plan be submitted by the Nativity Lutheran Church show
30 ing and addressing screening of the south side of the new parking lot.
31 The Planning Commission recommends consideration be also given to providing
32 landscaping for the northern portion of the west parking lot, as had
33 reportedly been agreed to previously;
34
35 b. that a six inch concrete curb be constructed around the perimeter of the
36 new parking lot;
37
38 c. that a quality engineered 8 inch diameter, or greater, storm drain pipe
39 be installed with cleanouts to drain the west parking lot;
40
41 d. that an information sign be .placed at the exit on the south side of the
42 south parking lot requiring only right hand turns (_only westbound traffic)
43 out of the driveway;
44
45 e. that a lighting plan for the parking lot be similar, or at the same standard,
46 of lighting normally accepted in a residential area;
47
48 f. that the parking lot expansion and building addition be constructed as one
49 unit; and
50
51 g. that any problems, perceived by the adjoining neighbor with the existing
52 _ large overhanging tree centered on the south parking lot property, be
53 ameliorated.
54
55
--10-
1 Further reasons for requiring these conditions on the permit approval are that the
2 ration of 145 parking spaces to the seating capacity of 510 is less deficient than
3 prior to this request.
4
5 Motion carried unanimously.
6
7 At 9:52 P.M. , the hearing to consider the petition from Bernard Blanske for rezoning
8 of .76 acres located at the southeast corner of Silver Lake Road and Silver Lane
9 from R-2, two family residence district, to R-3, townhouse residence district
10 which would allow him to construct eight townhouses on that property.
11
12 The notice of the hearing had. been published in the November 5, 1985 Bulletin and
13 mailed to all property owners of record within 350 feet of the subject property.
14 No one present reported failure to receive the notice or objected to its content.
15
16 As he had stated in his overview of the proposal in the agenda packet, Mr. Childs
17 indicated the project would meet all City ordinance requirements for setbacks
18 and lot size and would complete the development of Silver Lake Road from 39th
19 Avenue N.E. to Silver Lane-._'-He had also stated that he perceived a Silver Lane
20 access would be preferable to an' exit off Silver Lake Road.
21
22 Bob Blanske of Blanske Enterprises, 3829 N.E. Foss Road, represented his brother
23 who, he said, was. in Tucson, Arizona but would be calling back to see if there,
24 was any further information.that would be needed.
25
26 Commissioner Bjorklund indicated he was sorry that the single family home at 3017
27 Silver Lake Road broke the continuity of use for that strip and to some extent,
28 created what might ,be perceived as a "spot zoning" situation. Mr. Childs
29 reported that he had worked with Sid Johnson, who had previously discussed develop-
30 ment of the property, but who unsuccessfully attempted to persuade the owner of
31 the adjacent home, Mr. Bona, to move the existing home back onto property he
32 owned behind that lot.
33
34 A check of the City' s Comprehensive Plan indicated that whole strip at one time
35 had been considered for commercial retail development, which Mr. Childs commented
36 might account for the fact that there had been so little neighbor reaction to the
37 current proposal to construct townhomes there.
38
39 Mr. Blanske said the townhomes would be constructed as a quality project with brick
40 and stucco just as had all the other residences his brother had constructed in the
41 past. He estimated the unit costs would run around $85,000.
42
43 Mr. Childs indicated the parcel would have to be platted after the foundations are
44 in and the Planning Commission would have to review that platting.
45
46 There was no one present to speak against the rezoning and the hearing was closed
47 at 10:02 P.M. for development of a recommendation to the Council .
48
49 Motion by Commissioner Bowerman and seconded by Commissioner Wagner to recommend
50 the Council approve the rezoning of .76 acres of land owned by Bernard Blanske on
51 the'southeast-corner--bf..SilverLLake„Road_ and---Silver _Lanegeneral ly`descri-bed,_ the
5 2 Blanske Addition., that part of Lot 1 Ex the E 137.8 ft lying N .of Lot 2 and its
i
53 Ext. W being in so. Lot 1 , Blk 1 , from a R-2, two family residence district, to an
54 R-3, townhouse residence district, for the purpose of constructing eight townhomes
55 on that parcel , finding that:
-1-1-
1 1 . The use of the property for townhomes would be compatible with the R-3
2 development in the surrounding area;
3
4 2. Both a preliminary and final plat would have to be submitted for. Planning
5 Commission review once the exact dimensions of each foundation is determined;
6
7 3. The applicant had proposed in his October 21 , 1985 letter, a copy of which had
8 been included in the November 19th agenda packet, to provide landscaping,
9 trees, and shrubs in front of the project and the Planning Commission recommends
10 that, to separate the new construction from the traffic on Silver Lake Road,
11 the land in front of the buildings be 'bermed in a similar manner to the
12 St. Anthony Townhouses, just south of this project; and
13
_
14 4. There was no opposition to the rezoning expressed either during the hearing
15 or to staff prior to the hearing.
16
17 Motion carried unanimously.
18
19 At 10: 10 P.M. the hearing was opened to consider the request from King's Brian
20 Construction Company for subdivision without platting of Lots 8 and 9, Johnson
21 Manor, for the purpose of transferring two feet of land from the west side of
22 Lot 9 to the east side of Lot 8, creating lots which would be 78.95 feet and 77 feet
23 wide respectively.
24
25 The notice of the hearing had been published in the November 5, 1985 Bulletin and
26 mailed to all property owners of record within 350 feet of the subject property.
•
27 No one present indicated failure to receive the notice or objected to its content.
28
29 The Commission had given concept approval to the proposal at their October 15th
30 meeting, there had been a positive Council reaction, and Mr. Childs indicated
31 staff had received no calls either for or against the lot split.
32
33 The builder, Eddie Fuerstenberg, was again present to discuss the proposal . He
34 reiterated that the -lot split would enable him to build two larger homes on those
35 lots, which he perceived, would please property owners in that area. He could give
36 no explanation of why there was -'an 81 foot lot in that project, unless, he said,
37 that was what was left when the other -lots had been platted.
38
39 There were no objections raised to the request and the hearing was closed at
40 10: 15 P.M.
41
42 Motion by Commissioner Bowerman and seconded. by Commissioner Bjorklund to recommend
43 that the Council approve the .subdivision without platting which would permit the
44 transfer. of two feet of land from Lot 9 in the Johnson Manor project to Lot 8,
45 resulting in Lot 9 (2612 - 34th Avenue N.E. ) , becoming 78.95 feet wide and Lot 8
46 (2608 -34th Avenue N.E. ) being increased to 77 feet wide, to enable a better fit
47 of homes on those two lots.
48
49 In recommending approval of the lot split, the Commission finds that:
50
51 1 . The proposed change would result in lots of more equal size in the project;
52
53 2• The change would only be minor;
54
55
1 3. By permitting the subdivision without platting, the City would be expediting
• 2 the redevelopment of this tornado damaged addition; and '
3
4 4. No objections to the lot split had been raised, either during the Commission
5 hearing, or to the staff prior to the hearing.
6
7 Motion carried unanimously.
8
9 Randy Mikkelson, 909 East River Road, said his younger brother owned a 16 foot
10 wide by 150 foot deep lot just east of the former Clark gas station at the inter-
11 section of 33rd Avenue N-.E. and Stinson Boulevard and had asked Randy to get
12 ideas from the Commission members as to just what use the brother could make of
13 the substandard lot he had acquired a number of years ago through the payment of
14 delinquent taxes on the property. Mr. Childs said he understood the parcel had
15 previously been used as a utility transformer site. He said he had checked with
16 the City Attorney to see if the owner could put a garage on the parcel , which is
17 now zoned R-2, two family residence district, and Mr. Soth had said there had to
18 be a primary use on the parcel before an accessory building could be constructed,
19 which in this case, would have to be a duplex, which would never fit on a lot
20 that size.
21
22 The Manager said he wasn't sure what rights would accrue to the ownership of the
23 property but he had invited the applicant to come in to discuss with the Commission
24 members his problem with trying to utilize that parcel : Mr. Childs told them a
25 Mr. Fisher, who lives three or four doors north from the old Clark station had
26 purchased that property and had told Mr. Childs last summer he was considering
.
27 putting a 4 unit townhouse on the site. Mr. Fisher hadn't been in since, and the
28 Manager said he understood Mr. Fisher had not expressed a desire. to acquire the
29 Mikkelson property for that development.
30
31 When Commissioner Bjorklund said he had considered lodging a complaint about the
32 owner selling cars from that lot, Mr. Childs said he knew it was not Mr. Fisher
33 who was doing that, because it was he who had called the City to see if he could
34 have those cars towed away. However, he said some of the cars which are parked
35 there occasionally might belong to the owner.
36
37 Commissioner Bowerman indicated he could understand why it might be difficult to
38 pressure a new owner to put up townhomes on that corner which would then be the
39 only development on that intersection which would not be commercial . The Com-
40 missioner told Mr. Mikkelson that, in view of the City Attorney' s opinion, the
41 only other suggestion he could make as to the use of that substandard lot, would
42 be to have it attached to one of the properties on either side to expand the
43 use of that property.
44
45 Mr. Childs indicated he had researched and found there was case law for giving -
46 property owners of similar lots, surrounded by fully developed land, rights to
47 develop substandard lots, but since this was not a platted lot, having been only
48 land left over from a utility use, he was not sure-what rul.ing•.;aicourt might make
49 in this case.
50•
51 Commissioner Bowerman indicated he perceived there had never. been an intent by the
52 City that the land should be used for primary residential purposes and the Com-
53
om-
53 missioner told Mr. Mikkelson he was sorry the Commission was unable to give his
54 brother direction of how he could use his property. Commissioner Bjorklund
55 indicated he would vote against any development of that lot other than to permit
-13-
1 it to become a part of a viable project. When Mr. Mikkelson stated his brother
• 2 had- been paying taxes, including delinquent taxes, on the land and wondered what
3 he was getting back for those taxes, Commissioner Bjorklund suggested he might
4 be able to sell seasonal products from the lot, including Christmas trees and
5 pumpkins.
6
7 The Manager answered a question about fences by saying Mr. Mikkelson could
8 conceivably fence in the whole back yard for storage space as long as the fence
9 did not exceed six feet in height. However, Mr. Childs said hi:s main suggestion
10 would be that the property owner meet with the assessors to assure he was paying
11 only a minimum of taxes for land which could not be developed because of its
12 size, using a copy of the Commission minutes to prove that point if he wished.
13
14 Before adjournment, the Manager explained he had been forced to "load up" this
15 agenda because there were so many proposals, including the changes in the Kenzie
16 Terrace Redevelopment project, which the Commission would have to address at their
17 December 2nd meeting. These included requests related to the renovation of
18 the Legion Club and the Standard Station in the same block with the Kenzington
19 project.
20
21 Motion by Commissioner Bowerman and seconded by Commissioner Wagner to adjourn the
22 meeting at 10:37 P.M. for an informal discussion with the Manager about some of
, '2 3 the >projects' the Commission would be considering at their next meeting .
24
25 Motion carried unanimously.
2 6'
• 27
28
29
30 Respectfully submitted,
31
32 Helen Crowe, Secretary
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55