Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPL MINUTES 08181987 Meeting Sheet IIIIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIIIIIIIII 101694 Box: 21 Folder: PL MINUTES AND AGENDAS 1987 Doc4ment: PL MINUTES 08181987 --� A • C=TY OF S T - ANTHONY P L ANN=N G COMM= S S 2 ON M=NUTS S AU GU S T 1 8 , 3- 987 1 The meeting was opened by Chair Franzese at 7: 30 P.M. 2 Present for roll call: Franzese, London, Wingard, Hansen, 3 Wagner, Werenicz, Madden. 4 Also present: David Childs, City Manager 5 JULY 21 , 1987 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 6 Motion by Hansen, seconded by Wagner to approve with the following 7 changes: 8 Page 3 , line 34: Substitute 11300" for 113200" . 9 Page 4 , line 3: Delete "but" . 10 Page 4 , line 34: Substitute "asked" for "ask" . 11 Page 5, line 3 : Correct typo "proposed" . 12 Page 5 , line 17 : Correct typo "thast" . 13 Page 6, line 33 : Substitute "in" for "on" . 1014 Page 7 , line 3 : Substitute "residence" for "resident" . 15 Page 7 , line 22: Substitute "Jake" for "Jay" . 16 Page 8 , line 31: Correct typo "about" . 17 Page 11 , line 2: Correct typo 11$9,00011 . 18 Page 11 , line 9: Correct typo "there" . 19 Page 12 , line 39: Insert "was" after "project" . 20 Motion carried unanimously. 21 22 FRANZESE TO REPRESENT COMMISSION AT AUGUST 25TH COUNCIL MEETING 23 The Commission Chair indicated she would be able to report the minutes 24 of this meeting at the above. 25 PUBLIC HEARINGS 26 Request for Zoning Ordinance Amendment for Additional Caretaker Unit in 27 Mini-Warehouse Facility Postponed Until September 28 At 7:43 P.M. , the Chair opened the hearing on the above by reading the 29 notice at the hearing which had been published in the August 5th 30 Bulletin and mailed to owners of record of properties within 350 feet of 31 the subject property. No one present reported failure to receive the 32 notice or objected to its content. W3 Staff Report 34 Mr. Childs reported Ken Solie had called him that day and suggested 35 that, since neither he nor Jerry Cowan could make the meeting that 36 evening, action on their request be delayed another month. The 37 applicant had also indicated delaying the matter another month would be 38 no problem. 2 • 1 Commission Action 2 Motion by Wingard, seconded by Hansen to postpone action on Village 3 Properties' Ordinance amendment request until the Commission' s September 4 meeting. 5 Motion carried unanimously. 6 OTHER BUSINESS 7 Supreme Court Decision Related to "Taking Property" Mig_ht Not Be As 8 Threatening to Municipalities as First Assumed 9 Because it was too early to hold the next public hearing, Mr. Childs 10 asked if the Commissioners had any further questions on the conclusions 11 drawn in the Gene Franchette & Associates study he had included in the 12 Commission agenda packet. 13 Developers to be Selected for Final Phase of Kenzie Project 14 Mr. Childs reported the following about the above: 15 *the H.R.A. had received four "good" proposals from reputable 16 firms to complete the above project; 017 *this final phase had originally envisioned acquiring and demolish- 18 ing the old St. Anthony Village Shopping Center and replacing it 19 with 300 units of rental housing at market rate for persons 55 20 and over; 21 *a more recent market study had said the market was just not there 22 for that type of project but rather 200 units with 100 senior and 23 100 general occupancy units would meet the tax increment and 24 market requirements for the project; 25 *the Lang/Nelson company had proposed to build two three story 26 buildings in a phasing process with part senior and the other 27 part non-senior with underground parking; 28 *The P.J. Gaughan Company, who had built the LaBelle Park condos 29 in Columbia Heights, is proposing to, all in one phase, con- 30 struct two, three story buildings with the same mix and with 31 underground parking; 32 *Sherman Boosalis, another Twin Cities' developer, had indicated 33 they wanted to construct, in phases, 240 units of half senior and 34 half non-senior in two three story buildings; 35 *Kraus Anderson in combination with Walker Methodist Residences 36 and the Stuart Companies had proposed a project with two 4 story �37 buildings and a retail commercial strip of 17,000 square feet. 8 Walker would provide 80 units of senior housing; Stuart proposes • 3 1 100 units for general occupancy and Kraus Anderson would construct 2 the commercial portion. 3 The Manager said the H.R.A. would be reviewing those proposals, looking 4 at each developers' financial strength and judging the proposals on how 5 they related to the design guidelines, etc. , which had been established 6 for the project. He said he expected two of these companies to be 7 interviewed prior to the Council meeting and during the H.R.A. meeting 8 scheduled to be held August 25th, with possibly one of them being 9 selected at that time. If one developer is named that evening, they 10 would be given 30 days to work out a Redevelopers Agreement for doing 11 the project. If no agreement is worked out by then, the next highest 12 ranking contractor would be contacted to try to negotiate an acceptable 13 agreement with the H.R.A. , according to Mr. Childs. He added that all 14 four developers had appeared to meet all minimum requirements for a 15 "solid" developer with the financial strength to do a project which 16 would meet the tax increment needs of the City and all wanted to get 17 started right away. 18 With public hearings required before both the Commission and Council 19 once a developer is selected, and the time it would probably take to 20 acquire the land, Mr. Childs said he thought it would probably not be 21 before spring when construction could start, even though a few of the 22 firms had indicated a willingness to get going by February. The Manager 023 then invited the Commissioners to look at the copies of the proposals 24 which are available at City Hall. 25 The Manager then brought the Chair up to date on the new retail center 26 being constructed west of the Apache Mall, saying he understood the 27 building had been constructed to the point where tenants could finish 28 them to their own needs. The next public hearing scheduled for that 29 evening was opened at 7: 50 P.M. , as scheduled. 30 CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARINGS 31 Request for Temporary Office Facility for Minnesota Scientific Gains 32 Recommendation for Approval Under Certain Conditions 33 The Chair read the notice of the hearing, which had been published in 34 the August 5th Bulletin and sent to all property owners of record within 35 350 feet of the subject property. No one present reported failure to 36 receive the notice or objected to its content. 37 Application: for a Special Use Permit to allow Minnesota Scientific 38 to locate a 12 foot X 56 foot temporary mobile office on 39 the east side of the building they lease from Donatelle 40 Properties at 3839 Chandler Drive, until December, 1988. 41 Supporting V2 Documents: July 29th letter from the Minnesota Scientific President, 3 Bruce LeVahn; • 4 1 Mr. Childs' August 14th memorandum related to the 2 request proposing conditions which he perceived should 3 be imposed if the Commission decides to recommend 4 approval. 5 Staff report: Childs reiterated the advice in his memo as well as the 6 direction from the City Attorney that the matter should 7 be handled under a Conditional Use Permit since the City 8 doesn' t specifically address temporary structures of this 9 type; 10 said a permit of this type would not assume the use is 11 allowed and would give the City the option of imposing 12 reasonable conditions upon its use, thus giving the Com- 13 mission and Council two decision points; 14 included in the Commission' s task that night would be to 15 determine whether the use is allowed at all and to recom- 16 mend the conditions under which the Council should grant 17 a temporary permit to the applicants for the detached 18 mobile structure they were requesting; 19 reported there had been no calls either for or against 20 the proposal. • 21 Proponent: Mr. LeVahn repeated information he had given in his 22 letter related to the reasons his firm needs the extra 23 housing before they move to larger facilities Dona- 24 telle has promised to provide in New Brighton when 25 their lease expires; 26 indicated his firm' s sales and marketing offices would 27 be located in the mobile structure which would have to be 28 sited at least four feet away from the building to allow 29 access; 30 reported he had viewed one of the Gelco Space mobile 31 offices that day and had seen for himself that the pro- 32 posed structure would be the same length as the building 33 itself so it would present a pleasing appearance which 34 would not be detrimental to the neighborhood; 35 said he would be willing to skirt the structure if the 36 City wanted him to. 37 Commission 38 reaction: Madden questioned whether the front of the building 39 actually faced Foss Road rather than Chandler Drive and 40 wondered if the temporary structure couldn' t be located W1 on the west side; 5 1 acknowledged that there was a dock on that side but said 2 by doing that, the trailer would not be next to the resi- 3 dence on Chandler Drive; 4 was told by the firm president the building' s address is 5 Chandler Drive and even though there might be an access 6 on the far south side of the building, the Chandler Road 7 access would be easier in the winter; 8 Hansen was told the distance the trailer could be sited 9 from the building would depend on the type of wall 10 materials used and that the codes would be checked 11 regarding that -point before a building permit would be 12 issued; 13 questioned why the request had not reflected the firm' s 14 intent of moving when the lease expired in October; 15 was told by Mr. LeVahn that, with the kind of rents 16 Gelco charged, there was little chance the trailer 17 would be left on the site once Minnesota Scientific had 18 moved. 19 Wingard was told by Mr. LeVahn that the existing ash �20 tree should not be disturbed when the trailer is put in 21 place and that any sod which is damaged, would be re- 22 placed when his firm moves. 23 Franzese was told by Mr. Childs that he had been unable 24 to find records for specific permits for similar uses 25 although he recalled a request for a trailer next to 26 Central Engineering while that firm' s building was 27 being expanded and that the trailer Elmwood Church had 28 indicated they needed during construction had never been 29 put on that site. 30 Neighbor 31 Concerns: Bill Graff, 3824 Foss Road N.E. , indicated his only con- 32 cern was that when Minnesota Scientific moved out of 33 that the trailer be removed at the same time; 34 added, however, that since Mr. LeVahn had assured the 35 Commission that would be done, he would not be against 36 the City granting the permit. 37 No other persons were present to provide further input and the Chair 38 closed the hearing at 8: 03 P.M. for Commission consideration of a 39 recommendation to the Council. • 6 1 Commission Action 2 Motion by Wingard, seconded by Wagner to recommend the Council grant a 3 Special Use Permit to Minnesota Scientific which would allow the company 4 to temporarily install the 672 square foot mobile office they propose 5 on the east side of their building at 3839 Chandler Drive, on the 6 condition that: 7 *the trailer would be removed within 10 days of the date of Minne- 8 sota Scientific moves from their current building, but in any 9 event, the permit be issued for no later than December, 1988; 10 *the structure meets all applicable building, electrical, fire 11 and placement codes; 12 *the trailer be properly skirted and otherwise installed to be 13 aesthetically pleasing to the neighborhood; 14 *no trees be removed from the site to accommodate the structure; 15 *the area where the trailer is sited be resoded or reseeded as 16 needed, once the structure is removed; �7 *the permit only apply to the operations of Minnesota Scientific 18 and that immediate removal should be required should they cease 19 operations prior to the expiration of the permit. 20 In recommending the permit be granted, the Commission finds there have 21 been no expressions of neighborhood objection to the permit and the only 22 person who spoke at the Commission hearing was the next door neighbor 23 who said he had no objections to the permit per se, but was only 24 concerned that the trailer be removed at the same time Minnesota 25 Scientific vacates the premises. 26 Motion carried unanimously. 27 City' s Negotiations on Parkview Building Reported 28 When Commissioner Wingard had indicated he would like to see the City 29 find an acceptable site in St. Anthony to which Minnesota Scientific 30 could relocate rather than having Donatelle construct a building for 31 them in New Brighton, Mr. Childs facetiously suggested the Parkview 32 building might have the 10 ,000 square feet of space Mr. LeVahn was 33 looking for. 34 In a more serious vein, the Manager gave the above report which had been 35 requested by Commissioner Hansen, telling the Commissioners that: X36 *a while ago, District #282 had approached the City to ascertain 7 its interest in acquiring that building; 38 • 7 1 *he and several Councilmembers had been authorized to negotiate 2 with the School Board' s representatives; 3 *the City had come up with a package which was basically what the 4 school wanted at that time, and which the City agreed to, under 5 which the City would build a parking lot and play ground for the 6 school and would maintain the grounds around the school for the 7 next two years, which would cost between $80,000 and $90,000 to 8 do; 9 *some time later, the School Board indicated they needed an ap- 10 praisal made of the building and had a study made of what it would 11 cost them to move out of Parkview which turned out to be $273 ,000 12 of which the School District only has about $20,000 each for the 13 next two years; 14 *the School District said they were willing to pay about $60,000 15 of the moving costs, which put the school and the City about 16 $120,000 apart. 17 The School' s appraisal indicated the land was worth about $240,000 and 18 the building itself about $70 ,000. The School District study had 19 suggested a desirable use of the property would be to demolish the 20 building and erect single family homes on the site and they appear to be 01 considering doing that as one of their options. 22 Mr. Childs indicated the City had begun to question whether it would be 23 worth the City' s while to spend $200,000 for the building and then 24 another $200-250 ,000 to convert a portion of the building for the Fire 25 Department and to make the other improvements the City would want to, 26 including putting on a new roof and making the necessary changes to the 27 heating system. He said firm figures on doing that should be available 28 by the end of the week. 29 In the meantime, the School is jockeying around lots of ideas, including 30 tearing down the building which the Manager perceived could be very 31 interesting because that would force the eviction of the City. 32 If the City does not remain in Parkview, Mr. Childs said some 33 arrangements would have to be made to add on the existing fire station 34 or construct a new building, or find some alternate space somewhere. 35 The City Manager pointed out that the City had given the Parkview 36 property to the School District on the condition it be used only for 37 school purposes back in 1951. However, that condition had been negated 38 by the rule of law which says such a condition is only good for 30 years 39 which means the City' s rights expired in 1981 . the City' s position 40 remains that since St. Anthony had given the School District the land. 41 for the school, it doesn' t make sense to spend tax payers money to get W2 it back. He said the school' s initial argument for even charging 43 anything for the building in the first place had been that New Brighton 44 tax payers were also involved and the School Board was only trying to 8 1 satisfy their interests. Having gone from zero to the new high 2 figures, Mr. Childs said he didn' t know where the City would end up, but 3 the full bodies of both the City Council and School Board would meet in 4 a joint session to try' to talk about their respective positions sometime 5 during the week after Labor Day. It would be after that meeting that 6 the City would make a decision about whether to spend lots of money to 7 take over Parkview or to move elsewhere, in which case, it would be up 8 to the School District to figure out what to do with the building. 9 Commissioner Hansen reported he had attended all the School Board 10 meetings where the issue had been discussed and decided that, if it came 11 down to making a cul du sac and building from 9 to 11 homes on the 12 property, it would become an issue in which not only the Council but the 13 Planning Commission would be involved. He, therefore, said he believed 14 it was imperative that the Commission be kept informed. 15 Mr. Childs said he didn' t think the School Board members who might be 16 seriously thinking of taking on a big development project like that had 17 really understood the costs they would incur doing that. The Manager 18 added that it might be hard to sell the taxpayers on tearing down a 19 building which, although it might need some repairs, certainly wasn' t 20 dilapidated or falling down at this stage. 401 Commissioner Hansen pointed out that the School Board seemed to be 2 working with figures which indicated it would cost $100,000 to repair 23 the roof where the City had an estimate indicating it would only cost 24 between $60 ,000-$62,000 . He said he assumed from this, that the City 25 had a lot better grasp on what it would cost to convert, rather than to 26 redevelop the property. 27 Mr. Childs said he wanted to be certain his figures were accurate 28 because "that' s the kind of thing people never forget. " Commissioner 29 Hansen agreed, saying the City kept better minutes of its meetings so 30 extravagant claims like the roof repair figure could never be made. 31 The Commissioner said he sensed that when the School District realized 32 the change could never be made this fall, the whole process had slowed 33 down. Mr. Childs said that would give both parties the opportunity to 34 get their cost estimates together and would give people a better chance 35 to talk about the issues which are involved. 36 In reference to the empty lots on what was the school property across 37 the street, the Manager told Chair Franzese construction of a home on 38 one of the lots was going to start next week and he didn' t know why the 39 other property owners were so slow in building. 40 Staff Is Working on Ways of Cutting Down on Flooding Damage 41 When Commissioner Wingard suggested it might have been when water was up &2 to the doorsteps of one of the newly built houses in the Hertog 43 Development that the owner decided to put it up for sale. Mr. Childs 44 indicated on the wall map the location of landlocked land between 31st 9 1 and 32nd Avenues and Coolidge Street and Silver Lake Road for which 2 staff was seeking proposals form two engineering firms to do a 3 feasibility study on digging out a holding pond behind some of those 4 houses in which to store some of the rain which accumulates in that area 5 after every heavy rainfall. This might alleviate some of the flooding 6 problems people have experienced over the years, although it would be 7 almost impossible to prevent all the problems they experienced with the 8 last two "rains of the century," he added. 9 The Manager assured Commissioner Wingard that staff had not just 10 forgotten about those problems and were also considering the purchase of 11 75 manhole cover liners which would prevent storm water from seeping 12 into the sanitary sewer system at the same time it let sewer gas out. 13 Mr. Childs said each liner would cost the City $40 but it was perceived 14 that would be a good expenditure when the damage to homes from sanitary 15 sewer lines backing up is considered. 16 City Ordinance Already Provides Vehicles for Dealing With Vicious 17 Animals 18 Mr. Childs indicated the above in response to a question from the Chair 19 related to Pitt Bull Terriers. He read the sections in the Ordinance 20 which authorized the killing of the animal if the Police or Animal 21 rescue workers are not able to safely take them alive. Commissioner 4V22 Werenicz reported he knew of a Minneapolis "crack house" in North 23 Minneapolis where he and the Minneapolis "entry team" would be 24 conducting a search which no doubt would end in the elimination of just 25 such a guard dog. 26 ADJOURNMENT 27 Motion by Hansen, seconded by Madden to adjourn the meeting at 8: 30 P.M. 28 Motion carried unanimously. 29 30 Respectfully submitted, 31 Helen Crowe, Secretary 32 :cjk 0