HomeMy WebLinkAboutPL MINUTES 06181991 Meeting Sheet
IIIIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIIIII IIII
101413
Box: 19
Folder: RL MINUTES AND AGENDAS 1991
Document: PL MINUTES 06181991
1 CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
• 2 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
3
4 June 18, 1991
5
6 I. CALL TO ORDER.
7
8 The meeting was called to order at 7:32 p.m. with the Pledge of Allegiance led
9 by Chairman Madden.
10
11 II. ROLL CALL. -
12
13 Present: Madden, Brownell, Faust, Franzese, Gondorchin,
14 Murphy,-Werenicz.
15
16 Also Present: Thomas Burt, City Manager
17
18 III. APPROVAL OF MAY 21, 1991 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
19 MINUTES.
20
21 Page 1, Line 34: Change first "who" to "which."
22 . Page 2, Lines 6 and 7: Change ".:. lake. Which of course, in turn, would
23. raise ..." to "... lake, raising ..."
• 24 Page 2, Line 45: Delete first "the."
25 Page 2, Line 46: Change "neighborhood" to "neighborhood-oriented."
26 Page 3, Line 42: Change "above" to "near."
27 : Page 3, Line 47: Change "tht" to "that."
28 Page 4, Line 27: Change "... Design so the ..." to "... Design. The ..."
29 Page 5, Line 8: Change "sideyard setback" to "minimum lot width."
30 Page 5, Line 18: Change "Chair-" to "Chairman."
31 Page 5, Line 44: Change "sideyard setback" to "minimum lot width."
32 Page 6, Line 51: Change "that" to "the."
33 Page 8, Line 53: Delete "more."
34 Page 9, Line 44: Change "forty-dollar cost" to "forty- dollar per homeowner
35 cost."
36 Page 9, Line 45: Delete one "as."
37 Page 9, Line 47: Change "resident's" to residents'."
38 Page 10, Line 5: Delete "the."
39
40 Motion by Brownell, seconded by Murphy, to approve the minutes of the May
41 21, 1991 Planning Commission meeting as amended.
42
43 Motion carried unanimously.
44
45
• 46
PLANNING COMMISSION - JUNE 18, 1991
Page 2
• 1 IV. DESIGNATION OF PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE TO THE
2 JULY 9, 1991 CITY COUNCIL MEETING.
3
4 Commissioner Franzese will represent the Planning Commission at the July 9,
5 1991 City Council Meeting.
6
7 V. WALGREEN'S CONCEPT REVIEW.
8
9 Chairman Madden announced that Walgreen's had withdrawn their
io request to construct a store near the intersection of Coolidge and Kenzie
11 Terrace.
12
13 City Manager Burt reported that he received a call this day from Vern
14 Bergerud, representative of Walgreen's, stating that Walgreen's had decided to
15 abandon plans for development of their store near the corner of Coolidge and
16 Kenzie Terrace due to difficulties with the shape and size of the lot and due to
17 market insufficiency. Walgreen's is now investigating the Apache Mall location
18 as an alternative site in St. Anthony.
19
20 City Manager Burt stated that the ad hoc committee raised several pertinent
21 issues during its study of the Walgreen's concept, such as those of traffic
• 22 patterns and development in the St. Anthony Boulevard-Kenzie Terrace areas.
23 The ad hoc committee noted that the St. Anthony Boulevard gateway to the
24 community is very attractive and should be maintained, but that its appearance
25 and usage sharply contrast with the mixed development along Kenzie Terrace.
26 The ad hoc committee had proposed a moratorium on development along
27 Kenzie Terrace until such issues as traffic patterns, appearance, and continuity
28 of development and zoning are resolved.
29 .
30 City Manager Burt suggested that the Planning Commission might appropriately
31 address the zoning issues and Comprehensive Plan inconsistencies. For
32 example, at this time, the property known as the "Osborne property" is zoned
33 commercial in the midst of a residential zoning district. Additionally, there are
34 five contiguous lots, of which the north two are zoned residential,the middle two
35 are zoned commercial, and the last is zoned medium-density.
36
37 Commissioner Faust inquired as to the scope and authority of the ad hoc
38 committee. City Manager Burt responded that it has none, but that a broad
39 range of residents, business people, and other concerned citizens is beneficial
40 in guiding city planning.
41
•
PLANNING'COMMISSION - JUNE 18, 1991
Page 3
1 Commissioner Franzese commented that it was encouraging to see the manner
2 in which citizens and government were able to move quickly and in concert
3 when the Walgreen's issue arose, and that although the motivating issue is now
4 moot, the spirit of community cooperation has been tested and proved to be
5 vital.
6
7 Chairman Madden invited community members present to state their
s views.
9
:10 Jerry Kelly, 2809 Pahl Avenue, N.E., stated that he was happy to see that the
11 Walgreen's issue served to bond and strengthen the neighborhood.
12
13 Preston Williams, 2805 Pahl Avenue, N.E., agreed with Jerry Kelly's comments,
14 and further stated that additional commercial development in the gateway area
15 might create problems such as traffic congestion and the potential for crime and
16 vandalism drawn from other areas of the Cities. He expressed his support for
17 a moratorium until such time as the Planning Commission, City Council, and ad
is hoc committee jointly decide the most appropriate development of the gateway
19 area.
20
21 Connie Kozlak, 2612 Murray, agreed with Preston Williams's comments. She
•
22 further stated that the commercial zoning classification of the Osborne property
23 was not known by the neighborhood residents until the Walgreen's issue arose,
24 and that it is imperative that the property be rezoned residential. She stated her
25 support for a moratorium, noting that the Comprehensive Plan was last revised
26 twelve years ago in 1979.
27
28 Perry Thorvig, 3112 Townview Avenue, commented that although he does not
29 live in the immediate Coolidge-Kenzie neighborhood he passes through it every
30 day on his way to and from work. He feels that the uncoordinated development
31 of the area is unsightly at present, but that through consistent planning it can
32 be cleaned up, functionally changed, and improved so that it becomes a
33 community asset and a more liveable area for the neighborhood residents.
34
35 Dennis'Cavanaugh, 2909 St. Anthony Boulevard, presented the petition of 371
36 St.Anthony residents supporting the Coolidge-Kenzie development moratorium
37 as well as the rezoning of 2900 St. Anthony Boulevard. Mr. Cavanaugh stated
38 that one of the results of the ad hoc committee's activities was a better
39 appreciation of the function of commercial property. The committee members
40 came to the realization that commercial property pays taxes which would
41 otherwise become the burden of individual residents, and that the success of
i
PLANNING COMMISSION - JUNE 18, 1991
Page 4
• 1 commercial ventures must be encouraged through well thought-out planning.
2 He recommended that the City be proactive in its commercial development.
3
4 Lucille O'Brien, 2708 West Armour Terrace, stated that the St. Anthony gateway
5 is a beautiful area and that it would be a shame to spoil its appearance with a
6 less than attractive commercial building. She suggested that the library be
7 moved to the triangle lot and landscaped in a manner complementary to the
8 gateway area.
9
10 Chairman Madden informed the citizens present that the Planning
11 Commission would discuss the Coolidge-Kenzie development issue,taking their
12 viewpoints into consideration, and make a recommendation to the City Council.
13 He noted that the entire area from Autumn Woods and Kenzington to the
14 Coolidge-St. Anthony Boulevard area .needs to be considered in light of
15 Comprehensive Plan revisions, and that a moratorium is definitely in order until
16 such a review can take place. He stated that the Planning Commission should
17 be the focus of that task.
18
19 In response to a question by Commissioner Murphy, City Manager Burt stated
20 that there is no tax imcrement financing available to aid in the development of
21 the Coolidge-Kenzie area. Commissioner Murphy clarified his position by
22 stating that it does not make good business sense for the community to
23 encourage commercial development which will compete with and diminish the
24 commerce in a nearby area which it partially funded. He also commented that
25 he was pleased to see so many interested citizens in attendance at a Planning
26 Commission meeting, and that the appearance of the gateway area should be
27 maintained as a focal area of the City and for the betterment of the community,.
28
29 Commissioner Franzese compared the issue before the Planning Commission
30 to the city-wide Kenzie Terrace task force that was formed and active in 1981.
31
32 Motion by Brownell, seconded by Franzese, to recommend that the City
33 Council establish a one-year development moratorium regarding the Kenzie
34 Planning Area (designated as both sides of Kenzie Terrace from the entrance
35 to Walker on Kenzie northeast to the intersection of St. Anthony Boulevard and
36 Silver Lake Road and Kenzie Terrace, and including both sides of Coolidge
37 Street N.E. between Kenzie Terrace and St. Anthony Boulevard); to recommend
38 that the City Council form a task force to study and recommend development
39 in the Kenzie Planning Area; and that the entire Planning Commission be part
40 of that task force.
41
•
PLANNING COMMISSION - JUNE 18, 1991
Page 5
• 1 Commissioner Faust asked whether the ad hoc committee will survive as part
2 of the new task force or whether it will be dissolved. Commissioner Brownell
3 responded that he thought it should be the City Council's prerogative to form
4 a new task force.
5
6 In response to inquiry by Commissioner Werenicz, City Manager Burt stated
7 that the statutory time limit on such a moratorium is two years with an eighteen-
8 month extension.
9
to Chairman Madden asked about the feasibility of the City hiring a consultant to
11 guide the development effort. City Manager Burt answered that he would
12 personally recommend the hiring of a consultant because of the complexity of
13 the task.
14
15 Motion carried unanimously.
16
17 A five-minute recess was called by Chairman Madden.
18
19
20 VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS.
21
22 A. WALKER ON KENZIE, 2626 KENZIE TERRACE, SETBACK VARIANCE
23 REQUEST.
24
25 Chairman Madden stated that Phoenix Construction N.W., Inc. has applied for
26 permission to construct a canopy over the southeast entrance to Walker on
27 Kenzie, 2626 Kenzie Terrace, in order to prevent ice and snow buildup which
28 presents a safety problem. The proposed canopy will be nine feet from the
29 property line and will require a sixteen-foot variance from the twenty-five feet
30 required by the P.U.D.
31
3.2 No one present failed to receive notice of the hearing or objected to its content.
33
34 STAFF REPORT:
35
36 City Manager Burt reported that the original building plans were approved to
37 include a seventeen-foot setback rather than the twenty-five required by the
38 P.U.D., which granted the property an effective variance of eight feet at the time
39 of its construction. The sixteen-foot variance is being requested from the P.U.D.
40 requirement of twenty-five feet, but the actual variance will only be nine feet from
41 the present seventeen-foot setback. He stated that a hardship exists because
42 of the safety problem presented by the ice buildup.
•
PLANNING COMMISSION - JUNE 18, 1991
Page 6
• 1 PUBLIC HEARING:
2
3 Chairman Madden opened the public hearing at 8:30 p.m., and invited Steve
4 Barli of Phoenix Construction N.W., Inc. to present -his petition to the
5 Commission.
6
7 Mr. Barli stated that Phoenix was asked by the management of Walker on
8 Kenzie to construct the canopy for safety reasons. He noted that in addition to
9 the dangerous slipperiness of the ice, a potential fire hazard exists when the ice
10 builds up to the point where the door cannot be opened. He stated that the
11 canopy will be constructed as soon as the permit can be obtained.
12 -
13 The public hearing was closed at 8:33 p.m.
14
15 Motion by Franzese, seconded by Werenicz, to recommend that City Council
16 approve a sixteen-foot variance on the southeast side of Walker on Kenzie,
17 2626 Kenzie Terrace, for the purpose of allowing Phoenix Construction N.W.,
18 Inc. to construct a canopy eight feet in length, nine feet from the property line,
19 in order to remedy ice buildup at the southeast entrance; noting that the three
20 statutory requirements for a variance were met; and noting that no one
21 appeared in opposition to the request.
22
23 Motion carried unanimously.
24
25 B. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT RE: REZONING LAKESHORE
26 PROPERTIES.
27
28 Chairman Madden introduced the issue by stating that the Planning
29 Commission will consider the creation of a new zoning district, R-1 A, applicable
30 to single-family homes around Silver Lake to protect the natural amenities of the
31 lake and to recognize the unique features of the land.
32
33- No one present failed to receive notice of the hearing or objected to its content.
34
35 STAFF REPORT:
36
37 City Manager Burt explained that the new zoning district is sought because of
38 current setback requirements that create hardships for people who are building
39 or remodeling. The City requires that homes be set back thirty feet or equal to
40 the the average of the two adjacent homes. In cases where smaller, older
41 homes are set back fifty or sixty feet from the street, this creates a problem for
42 those wishing to build in between such sites. Additionally, the Department of
PLANNING COMMISSION - JUNE. 18, 1991
Page 7
1 Natural Resources encourages that structures be built no less than 75 feet from
2 the lake in order to preserve sight lines and in order to prevent the building of
3 structures which might cause runoff into the lake. These conditions have
4 created an excessive number of variance requests.
5
6 The objectives of creating the new zoning district are to eliminate the excessive
7 number of variance requests while continuing to protect the water quality of
8 Silver Lake, which can be harmed by numerous impervious structures built too
9 close to the lake.
10
11 City Manager Burt participated in discussions with both the City Attorney and
12 the lake residents' ad hoc committee. The alternative of changing the 30-foot
13 street setback requirement was considered. City Manager Burt stated that
14 decreasing the 30-foot setback requirement would limit the space necessary for
15 wintertime snow storage. Increasing the 30-foot setback requirement would
16 cause even more difficulties for those building on smaller lots.
17 _
18 City Manager. Burt informed the.Planning Commission that the City Council has
19 already had two readings of the proposed ordinance and that the third reading
20- is required in order to pass the ordinance. Existing structures are, of course,
21 grandfathered in, but any structure beyond repair which needs to be rebuilt
•
22 would require a building permit.
23
24 In response to the question by Commissioner Faust, City Manager Burt
25 responded that any new construction must be reviewed by the Watershed
26 District, and that the DNB's 75-foot setback is a recommendation and not a law,
27 although it has been respected to date. He stated that the passing of the new
28 ordinance will compensate for the lack of a St. Anthony shoreline preservation
29 act.
30
31 City Manager Burt continued that the City is attempting to determine which
32 kinds of structures will not cause runoff into the lake and might, therefore, be
33 built closer than 75 feet from the shoreline. It has so far been suggested that
34 structures with pervious surfaces such as decks can be built to within fifty feet
35 of the lakeshore, but that structures with impervious surfaces such as cement
36 patios should be built no closer than 75 feet from the lakeshore. Swimming
37 pools have never been considered structures and could, therefore, be built
38 within the fifty-foot limit. Preservation of a fifty-foot sight line around the lake
39 was determined to be adequate.
40
41 Commissioner Murphy suggested that the ordinance should address the ratio
42 of impervious surface to lot size. City Manager Burt replied that the City is in
PLANNING COMMISSION - JUNE 18, 1991
Page 8
• 1 the process of considering such an ordinance which would apply to the entire
2 City.
3
4 In response to a question by Commissioner Brownell, City Manager Burt replied
5 that there are no boathouses on the lake at present because the DNR frowns
6 on the use of gasoline associated with them. A boathouse as addressed in the
7 . proposed ordinance simply refers to a garage for a boat, and it must be located
8 75 feet from the shoreline.
9
10 Commissioner Franzese inquired whether the proposed ordinance might include
11 a water quality provision. City Manager Burt replied that he 'and Council
12 Member Enrooth are working together to draft a water quality ordinance, and
13 are waiting to receive a copy of Eagan's water quality ordinance for use as a
14 guideline.
15
16 Commissioner Faust asked why advance approval of the Rice Creek Watershed
17 District was not mentioned in the proposed ordinance. City Manager Burt
18 replied that the City wished to maintain the ultimate authority of the City Council
19 and the Planning Commission, and that the Rice Creek Watershed District
20 would be in a position of making recommendations to the Commission and the
21 Council regarding any requests.
• 22
23 PUBLIC HEARING:
24
25 Chairman Madden opened the public hearing at 8:52 p.m.
26
27 Doug Jones, 2505 Silver Lane, spoke in favor of the proposed zoning district.
28 He stated that the proposed ordinance will not only serve to clarify building and
29 remodeling regulations for those purchasing older lake homes, but will protect
30 the shoreline by prohibiting overbuilding.
31
32 The public hearing was closed at 8:55 p.m.
33
34 Commissioner Gondorchin asked Commissioner Faust, member of the Silver
35 Lake Committee, for his opinion of the proposed ordinance. Commissioner
36 Faust commented that making a change of this magnitude will create
37 consternation on the part of some of the lake residents simply because it is a
38 change. He hoped that common sense would prevail in allowing people to
39 replace deteriorating structures, although he did not foresee much additional
40 building taking place. He stated that passing the proposed ordinance would
41 be the correct thing to do in order to protect water quality, under the
i
PLANNING COMMISSION - JUNE 18, 1991
Page 9
• 1 circumstances, because certain concessions must always be made when living
2 in such a condensed area.
3
4 Motion by Faust, seconded by Brownell, that City Council approve the passage
5 of Ordinance 1991-004 creating the new zoning district R-1 A for single-family
6 houses around Silver Lake to protect the natural amenities of the lake and to
7 recognize the unique features of the land.
s
9 Commissioner Brownell commented that he felt passage of the ordinance would
10 be good from the standpoint of controlling water runoff into the lake, but did not
11 foresee the ordinance lessening the burden of variance requests.
12
13 Motion carried unanimously.
14
15 C. ZONING ORDINANCE, RE: REZONING OF CERTAIN NON-CONFORMING
16 PROPERTIES.
17
18 Chairman Madden introduced the ordinance, stating that pursuant to the
19 Comprehensive Plan several properties are recommended for rezoning. These
20 properties consist of each and every townhouse and condominium within the
21 Mirror Lake development, all with Foss Road addresses, as well as the property
•
22 located at 2900 St. Anthony Boulevard.
23
24 No one present failed to receive notice of the hearing or objected to its content.
25
26
27 Chairman Madden stated that the Foss Road properties are currently zoned L-
28 1, which is to be changed to R-4, and that the 2900 St. Anthony Boulevard
29 property is currently zoned C, which is to be changed to R-1.
30
31 STAFF REPORT:
32
33 City Manager Burt reported that he discovered some of the inconsistencies in
34 the Comprehensive Plan in conjunction with his investigation of the proposed
35 Walgreen's site. Additionally, his office has received many calls in the past
36 regarding the Mirror Lake developments from buyers and sellers who encounter
37 problems with lenders because of the light industrial zoning designation.
38 Changing the L-1 designation to R-4 is simply a housekeeping matter, and the
39 L-1 designation does not pose a problem for the developments. He predicted
40 that there are other areas of the City which will require similar changes of
41 zoning designation.
42
PLANNING COMMISSION - JUNE 18, 1991
Page 10_
• 1 Commissioner Faust stated his feeling that rezoning the 2900 St. Anthony
2 Boulevard property at this time would be premature in light of the moratorium
3 recommendation. City Manager Burt stated that the rezoning would not have
4 an effect on the study. Commissioner Werenicz stated that he would like to see
5 the property rezoned at this time because its current use is R-1, residential.
6
7 PUBLIC HEARING:
s
9 Chairman Madden opened the public hearing at 9:06 p.m.
10
11 William Swiriduck of 3914 Foss Road N.E., Apartment 102, president of the
12 Mirror Lake Condominium Association, asked what effect the rezoning might
13 have on property taxation. City Manager Burt responded that it would have no
14 effect because property values are based on use rather than zoning.
15
16 Connie Peterson of 2816 St. Anthony Boulevard asked whether some action
17 might take place which would make it impossible for the Walgreen's situation
18 to arise in the future. Chairman Madden responded that approval of the
19 moratorium would prevent such a situation from arising for the next twelve
20 - months, and that the development plan produced would be the final
21 determinant.
22
23 Dennis Cavanaugh, 2909 St. Anthony Boulevard, stated his support of the
24 rezoning of 2909 St. Anthony Boulevard and his hope that the property in the
25 gateway area would never become commercial.
26
27 Donald Evertz, 2817 St. Anthony Boulevard, indicated his agreement with Mr.
28 Cavanaugh. He stated that the neighborhood was not aware of the zoning
29 designation of the 2900 St. Anthony Boulevard property until the Walgreen's
30 proposal was put forth.
31
32 Doug Jones, 2505 Silver Lane, recalled that a similar rezoning proposal for the
33 2900 St. Anthony Boulevard property was before the Planning Commission and
34 City Council some years ago, although no action was taken at that time.
35
36 The public hearing was closed at 9:11 p.m.
37
38 Chairman Madden and Commissioners Brownell and Murphy stated their
39 support for rezoning the Foss Road and St. Anthony Boulevard properties.
40 Commissioner Faust restated his reservations regarding the inconsistency
41 between recommending rezoning the 2900 St. Anthony Boulevard property and
42 at the same time recommending a development moratorium including that
PLANNING COMMISSION - JUNE 18, 1991
Page 11
• 1 property. Chairman Madden stated that he felt the highest and best•use of the
2 property was clearly residential, but Commissioner Faust disagreed, stating that
3 the marketplace had indicated otherwise.
4
5 City Manager Burt stated that rezoning the 2900 property would have no impact
6 on the moratorium, or vice versa, and that the Commission should keep in mind
7 that the moratorium is at this time only a recommendation that has not yet been
8 approved by the City Council.
9
10 Commissioner Werenicz indicated his support for rezoning the 2900 St.Anthony
11 Boulevard and the Foss Road properties. He stated that updating the
12 Comprehensive Plan has been discussed as long as he has been on the
13 Planning Commission but that it has not been accomplished. He noted that
14 updating it little by little would certainly be easier than trying to do it all at once.
15
16 Motion by Franzese, seconded by Brownell, to recommend that City Council
17 approve the rezoning of 2900 St. Anthony Boulevard from C to R-1; that City
18 Council approve the rezoning of 3912, 3914-16, 3915-21, 3923, 4000-02, 4004-
19 06, 4008-10, 4012-14, 4060-66, 4061-67, 4068-74, 4069-75, 4076-86, 4077-87,
20 4088-98, and 4089-99 Foss Road from L-1 to R-4; in order that the zoning of the
21 properties be brought into compliance with their existing uses; noting that
•
22 rezoning is supported by the Comprehensive Plan; and noting that no one
23. appeared in opposition to the rezoning.
24
25 Motion carried unanimously.
26
27 VII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS.
28
29 A. REVIEW OF THE FINAL PLAT FOR THE FOSS ROAD PATIO HOMES
30 (HARSTAD COMPAN) ). 3816 FOSS ROAD.
31
32 Commissioner Madden commented that the plat submitted is not a legal
33 document because it does not bear the signature of a registered land surveyor.
34 City Manager Burt stated that the .City is waiting for the County to submit a
35 signed plat. In response to a question by Commissioner Murphy, Burt indicated
36 that he foresaw no changes being made by the County.
37
38 STAFF REPORT:
39
40 City Manager Burt explained that City Council had approved the plat as
41 submitted by the developer, without the addition of twelve parking spaces,
42 because the Council was very concerned about preserving the green space in
•
PLANNING COMMISSION - JUNE 18, 1991
Page 12
• 1 the development. Staff had recommended that no parking be allowed on the
2 east side of the street, primarily to allow passage of emergency vehicles.
3 Additionally, since Harstad has doubled the required parking allowance from
4 one inside/one outside to two inside/two outside, there will be very little need
5 for additional street parking by the residents.
6
7 City Manager Burt reported that the fire marshal has determined that there is
8 no need for an additional fire hydrant near the development. The ordinance
9 requires that a water source must be within 150 feet of a property, but that is
10 easily accomplished with the use of pumpers carried by the fire trucks.
11
12 Commissioner Werenicz questioned the decision of the City Council to require
13 greenspace rather than parking .spaces when only the residents of the
14 development would be able to see the green space. City Manager Burt replied
15 that there is a general concern about the amount of pavement in the City, and -
16 that Mirror Lake, a holding pond, might conceivably overflow if, forced to
17 - accommodate too much runoff. Commissioner Werenicz commented that the
i8 people who live in the development might eventually regret not having enough
19 ' parking spaces, similar to the Kenzington situation. City Manager Burt
20 . commented that the Kenzington developer was unrealistic in allowing only one
21 parking stall per unit, which was a very different situation from the Foss Road
22 Patio Homes situation. Chairman Madden noted that the Caravelle Apartment
23 complex is having its parking lot resurfaced, forcing residents to park on Foss
24 Road, but that the street parking seems to be adequate at this time.
25
26 Motion by Brownell, seconded by Franzese, to recommend that City Council
27 approve the final plat for the Foss Road Patio Homes subject to signature by
28 a registered land surveyor; that the City Council reconsider requiring twelve
29 additional outside parking spaces on site; and that the developer provide
30 adequate and proper drainage on the property until it reaches the public
31 driveway, as recommended in the staff report.
32
33 Commissioner Faust stated his support for the motion, saying that it is
34 important that the Commission indicate to the Council the seriousness of its
35 recommendation for additional parking, even if further negotiations are
36 necessary. Commissioner Gondorchin added that the residents who were
37 present for the initial Planning Commission meeting also indicated their strong
38 desire for sufficient parking at the development. Commissioner Brownell
39 reiterated the fact that the Commission felt very strongly about providing the
40 additional parking spaces based on the land use and the comments received
41 by the residents. Commissioner Werenicz stated that the green space would
42 be enjoyed only by the residents of the development, and not by the rest of the
PLANNING COMMISSION - JUNE 18, 1991
Page 13
1 City, and that the residents who attended the meeting had indicated a very
2 strong desire for additional parking. Commissioner Franzese expressed the
3 desire to avoid repeating the parking errors made at the Kenzington project.
4
5 Motion carried unanimously.
6
7 MISCELLANEOUS.
8
9 Commissioner Faust asked about the situation at the Mobil Gas Station
to on Silver Lake Road. City Manager Burt responded that the tanks are:being
11 removed because of soil contamination, and that once clean dirt is replaced the
12 station will be vacant.
13
14
15 Commissioner Gondorchin noted that the swimming pool is not ready for
16 use. City Manager Burt stated that the City's Public Works department recently
17 has been short three people, but that it would be ready for use very soon.
18
19 Commissioner Franzese noted that the Popham, Haik law firm had
20 provided an interesting seminar regarding land taking. Commissioner Faust
21 stated that Judge Simonette made an excellent presentation which shed light
• 22 on current situations. Commissioner Faust stated that one of Judge
23 Simonette's main points was that public displeasure was not sufficient reason
24 to thwart development. Commissioner Faust felt that, according to the
25 information received in the seminar, St. Anthony seems to be operating
26 correctly.
27
28 VIII. ADJOURNMENT.
29
30 Motion by Brownell, seconded by Murphy,to adjourn the Planning Commission
31 meeting at 9:44 p.m.
32
33 Motion carried unanimously.
34
35
36
37 Respectfully submitted,
38
39 Doris Hoskin
40 Recording Secretary
41
42
S