HomeMy WebLinkAboutPL MINUTES 03161993 Meeting Sheet
IIIIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIIIIIIIII
ioizsa
Box: 19
Folder: PL MINUTES AND AGENDAS 1993
Document: PL MINUTES 03161993
CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
2
3 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
4
5 MARCH 16 , 1993
6
7
8 1 . CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
9
10 The meeting was called to order at 7 : 00 p.m. and the Pledge of
11 Allegiance was led by Chair Faust .
12
13 2 . ROLL CALL
14
15 Members Present : Thompson, Franzese Gondorchin , Murphy,
16 Werenicz, Madden and Faust
17
18 Staff Present : Management Assistant Urbia
19
20 3 . APPROVAL OF FEBRUARY 16 , 1993 MEETING MINUTES
21
22 Motion by Murphy, second by Gondorchin to approve the minutes
23 of the February 16 , 1993 Planning Commission Meeting with the
24 following corrections :
25
page 1 , line 37 : Correct "COMMISION" to "COMMISSION"
page 2 , lines 36/38 : This paragraph should read as follows :
28 "Commissioner Franzese raised a concern regarding the
29 inclusion of visibility and sightline issues in the
30 ordinance . "
31 page 3 , line 6 : Change "with" to "but"
32 page 3 , line 24 : The vote on the motion was omitted and Motion
33 carried unanimously should be added .
34 page 4 , lines 20/23 : The second sentence should read as
35 follows : "Management Assistant Urbia made the case to permit
36 the sign because it faces two roadways , the frontage road and
37 Highway #8 . " In line 22 the word "follow up" should have a
38 hyphen , " follow-up"
39 page 5, line 5 : Correct the spelling of "appropriate"
40
41 Commissioner Madden is of the opinion that correction of
42 typographical errors in the minutes is not appropriate.
43
44
45 Motion carried unanimously
46
47 4 . DESIGNATION OF COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE TO THE APRIL 13 , 1993
48 CITY COUNCIL MEETING
49
50 Chair Faust questioned a need for a Planning Commission member
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
2 MARCH 16 , 1993
3 PAGE 2
4
5 to be in attendance at the April 13 , 1993 City Council
6 Meeting. This matter was discussed later in the meeting.
7
8 5 . PUBLIC HEARINGS
9
10 There were no public hearings .
11
12 6 . MISCELLANEOUS
13
14 A. Utility Buildings
15
16 A memo from Urbia stated that information regarding sheds and
17 utility buildings is found in five sections of the City Code.
18 He recommended these sections be referred to regarding
19 definitions for accessory uses of utility buildings .
20
21 Commissioner Madden noted he has not reviewed the sections
22 recommended by Urbia for reviewal . He had concerns with the
23 allowable size of these buildings . He also was concerned with
24 specific setback requirements when rear yards face a city
25 street . He felt it would be worth looking at to see if
0 different setback requirements should apply.
28 Chair Faust noted this type of situation could be a real
29 eyesore. He said there is a potential for this on 37th Avenue
30 where some yards face that avenue and on Edgemere as well .
31
32 The Chair directed Urbia to pursue information on this item
33 and see how it is currently being handled. He requested this
34 information be presented to the Planning Commission at its
35 next regular meeting.
36
37 Urbia suggested there may be concerns regarding the materials
38 used to build utility buildings .
39
40 Chair Faust inquired if the Uniform Building Code is used as
41 a guide by Larry Hamer, the Public Works Director . Urbia
42 responded that this is the case but pre-fab buildings may be
43 approved in some instances .
44
45 Urbia noted also that some pre-fab buildings could be put up
46 without staff knowledge. Commissioner Gondorchin inquired what
47 action would be taken if this situation occurred. Urbia
48 responded that the property owner could be required to get a
49 permit . Removal of the structure was unlikely but a foundation
50 may be required.
•
01 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
2 MARCH 16 , 1993
3 PAGE 3
4
5
6 Currently, a cement slab or treated wood base is required so
7 that the bottom of a utility building does not decay.
8
.9 Dimensional regulations are covered in the zoning ordinance.
10 Maintenance of these structures is covered in the recently
11 adopted Housing Maintenance Ordinance.
12
13 Another example of this type of structure could be a large
14 garage which was a possibility noted by Chair Faust .
15 Commissioner Madden cited a second garage located on property
16 on Chandler Drive. He recalled that the Planning Commission
17 had recommended denial of the permit for this garage but the
18 City Council gave its approval .
19
20
21 7 . STAFF UPDATE
22
23 A. Sian Amortization
24
25 Some members of the City Council did not feel the matter of
sign amortization was necessary for inclusion on the sign
ordinance nor were further restrictions regarding business
28 signs .
29
30 Urbia advised that the owners of Northgate were sent a letter
31 advising them of their sign non-compliance. They will be
32 requesting a variance in late April . This will be treated as
33 a variance request as the building is not facing two streets .
34 The first sign request was approved as a variance .
35
36 Urbia advised that the owners were very cooperative.
37
38 B. Directional/Informational Sians
39
40 Commissioner Franzese directed the Commission members '
41 attention to page 7 of the February 23rd Council meeting
42 minutes . They read as follows , " The City Manager advised that
43 these types of signs , directional and informational , are not
44 defined in the sign ordinance nor are these types of signs
45 controlled. " She questioned what was considered directional
46 and informational .
47
48 Urbia advised that approximately 30 letters went to properties
49 in the City advising them of their non-conforming signs . Among
50 the signs which were viewed as non-compliant was the DARE
•
•1 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
2 MARCH 16, 1993
3 PAGE 4
4
5
6 sign at Wilshire Elementary School .
7
8 Commissioner Madden inquired if other commissioners felt the
9 phrase "Conoco - Hottest Brand Going" was informational . He
10 stated that staff views it as informational .
11
12 Urbia gave some examples of non-defined signs such as those
13 which are placed on top of gas pumps or those which indicate
14 whether a car wash is open for business .
15
16 Commissioner Madden stated he agrees with Commissioner
17 Franzese with regard to her statements made at the February
18 9th Council Meeting. Commissioner Franzese stated she views
19 the sign ordinance as an enabling document and that some types
20 of new signs have not been addressed in it . She also stated
21 that she views the dimension of staff "flexibility" as a ruse
22 and a subversion of the intent of the ordinance.
23
24 Commissioner Madden gave some examples of signs he views as
25 advertising rather than informational ; among them were the
signs which read, "hot dogs, " "Conoco" and "Holds all of the
cards . "
28
29 He felt the new sign ordinance was very clear in defining
30 advertising although there are some signs being allowed by
31 staff which convey information but he felt are actually
32 advertising.
33
34 With the new sign ordinance and the new comprehensive sign
35 plan, Commissioner Madden felt the City should "get its ducks
36 in a row. "
37
38 Commissioner Franzese corrected the interpretation of what is
39 a "ruse and a subversion" as made by Commissioner Madden . She
40 advised these comments referred to two signs placed on one
41 side of a building with both signs facing the same street . She
42 was not referring to informatinal nor advertising signs as
43 stated by Commissioner Madden .
44
45 Commissioner Franzese had observed that at the February 9th
46 Council Meeting, the City Manager advised that such signs as
47 directional or informational are not addressed in the sign
48 ordinance as staff feels these situations should be addressed
49 without having to amend the sign ordinance in each instance.
50
•
01 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
2 MARCH 16 , 1993
3 PAGE 5
4
5
6 Commissioner Franzese also referred to comments made by
7 Councilmember Fleming at the February 9th Council Meeting
8 regarding a review of the sign ordinance by local business
9 persons . Councilmember Fleming reported that the two business
10 persons she contacted found the sign ordinance a legal maze
11 and difficult to follow.
1.2
13 The Commissioner felt these comments were unfortunate as it
14 was thought that the City had a very comprehensive ordinance .
15 She requested that these two business persons be identified.
16 She also felt that the DARE sign should have remained in
17 place. Urbia advised that the letter of non-compliance was
18 sent to the school as the sign had been up more than thirty
19 days not because it was not approved. He felt that staff
20 flexibility allowed for it not being removed.
21
22 Chair Faust restated his request for staff to gather
23 information and definitions relative to directional and
24 informational signs . He felt the term " informational " was
25 generic and not specific .
VCommissioner Murphy noted that many signs which are viewed as
28 non-compliant are temporary. He inquired as to what is
29 contained in the ordinance regarding temporary signs .
30
31 Chair Faust read that section in the ordinance which addressed
32 temporary, commercial signs . He noted that service station
33 pump signs are not mentioned. Commissioner Madden felt the
34 pump signs looked rather permanent to him. He also requested
35 the definition of directional signs in the ordinance .
36
37 Urbia advised that directional signs are defined but are not
38 enabled or referenced in the ordinance .
39
40 Commissioner Madden stated he feels directional signs are not
41 a problem. He is of the opinion that the informational signs
42 introduced by staff are the problem.
43
44 Urbia advised that the City Manager is of the opinion that St .
45 Anthony has a tough sign ordinance. Staff is leaning toward
46 allowing signs which are informational and contain
47 advertising. This is being handled by the City' s Zoning
48 Administrator.
49
50
•
01 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
2 MARCH 16 , 1993
3 PAGE 6
4
5
6 Commissioner Murphy suggested that staff should be making the
7 ordinance user-friendly as it appears not to be designed for
8 the business community. He felt staff should recommend the
9 ordinance be modified or they should be directed to enforce
10 what is presently on the books .
11
12 Commissioner Madden felt that the comprehensive sign ordinance
13 was totally ignored and swept under the rug regarding the
14 signage at Stop-N-Shop.
15
16 Commissioner Murphy inquired what procedure is followed by
17 staff when a sign request is received which is not covered by
18 the sign ordinance . Urbia responded that the Zoning
19 Administrator decides and interprets the ordinance.
20
21 Commissioner Murphy felt the intent of the Planning Commission
22 regarding this matter was to avoid a rubber stamping approval
23 of signs not addressed in the ordinance. He feels this needs
24 more interpretation and enforcement .
25
Urbia noted that the City Manager is responding to direction
from the City Council . Commissioner Murphy suggested that the
28 City Council has a different philosophy than the Planning
29 Commission on this matter .
30
31 Chair Faust requested that the Zoning Administrator attend a
32 Planning Commission Meeting to discuss the City Council
33 philosophy regarding the sign ordinance and the definition of
34 new terms in the ordinance.
35
36 C. Parkincj Ordinance
37
38 Chair Faust inquired if there is anything new to report on the
39 parking ordinance. Urbia responded as far as he knows there is
40 nothing new.
41
42 Commissioner Franzese advised that at the March 2nd Council
43 work session the City Manager requested the City Council to
44 discuss any further feelings towards the proposed parking
45 ordinance . The Council did not feel an ordinance would be
46 appropriate as the problem has addressed itself , probably from
47 further awareness by exposure in the media .
48
49 Commissioner Gondorchin took exception to this conclusion and
50 feels the ordinance should be further explored.
01 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
2 MARCH 16 , 1993
3 PAGE 7
4
5 Commissioner Franzese requested that the City Manager clarify
6 the statement that the Planning Commission had observed that
7 the situation has taken care of itself and that most blatant
8 examples of parking violations have disappeared . She felt a
9 more accurate statement would have been that the City Manager
10 had advised the Planning Commission that most of the problems
11 have taken care of themselves .
12
13 Commissioner Murphy recalled that this matter had been tabled
14 by the Planning Commission until the results of a community
15 survey were available .
16
17 Urbia advised that the survey concentrated on the future needs
18 of a community center and some other issues but did not
19 include anything on a parking ordinance . He noted that if a
20 second survey had been commissioned it may have included
21 questions regarding a parking ordinance . At this point in
22 time, a second survey has not been approved .
23
24 Chair Faust felt it would be fruitless to move forward on this
25 matter without City Council direction . He suggested it is a
06 dead issue.
7
28 Commissioner Franzese felt the impetus to back off this issue
29 came from the City Council to the City Manager .
30
31 8 . COMMISSIONERS ' COMMENTS
32
33 A. Commissioner Thompson
34
35 Commissioner Thompson inquired as to the status of the
36 dentists ' office project on Silver Lake Road. Urbia advised
37 that the requested variance was not granted . Other
38 arrangements have been made to move the dumpster to a less
39 conspicious location .
40
41 B. Commissioner Franzese
42
43 Commissioner Franzese stated she will be unable to attend the
44 tour of the Hennepin County garbage burner facility.
45
46 She also inquired if the City ' s Planning Commission could join
47 the Minnesota Planning Agency. Urbia stated that the City is
48 presently experiencing a tight budget . He suggested that
49 perhaps a staff member could join rather than the entire
50 Commission .
0
01 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
2 MARCH 16, 1993
3 PAGE 8
4
5 This arrangement would accommodate having the entire body
6 receive the benefits of this Association and not be quite so
7 expensive .
8
9 Commissioner Franzese requested staff to inquire if there is
10 a group rate available. She feels the organization has very
11 good information available and hosts very beneficial planning
12 sessions , seminars , etc .
13
14 Urbia will get information regarding costs for a group as well
15 as individual member costs . Chair Faust suggested that perhaps
16 individual members of the Planning Commission could attend
17 some of the functions on a rotating basis .
18
19 Commissioner Franzese feels the Planning Commission needs some
20 type of continuing education. Having some experts brought in
21 to speak to the Planning Commission should be considered.
22
23 Commissioner Franzese inquired as to the status of the CUB
24 store and any information on the Community Center . She also
25 inquired what was available regarding water problems in Silver
Lake .
7
28 Urbia reponded that there is limited new information on these
29 matters . The Silver Lake Homeowners ' Association have
30 submitted a petition to the Rice Creek Watershed District
31 which reflects their concern for the Lake ' s water quality.
32
33 Commissioner Franzese stated that the Silver Lake Homeowners '
34 Association feels very strongly that Apache Plaza is a major
35 pollutor of the Lake and that the CUB project should not go
36 ahead without this issue being addressed.
37
38 Chair Faust feels there are two issues which are of concern
39 regarding Silver Lake, those being phosphates and trash. He is
40 confident that the owners of Apache Plaza are doing everything
41 possible to see the situation improves .
42
43 Barr Engineering is conducting studies for the C, G. Rein
44 Company, who owns Apache Plaza . These studies address
45 environmental concerns . Barr is proposing placing thirteen
46 large holes on the property which will catch flow and remove
47 major particles . This will address the trash issue . Chair
48 Faust stated that the second concern , that of phosphates ,
49 comes from fertilizer and vehicles which remain parked for
50 long periods of time .
0
01 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
2 MARCH 16 , 1993
3 PAGE 9
4
5
6 Holding ponds would alleviate some of the problems being
7 experienced and anticipated with the new development . Barr
8 looked into this possibility but it was decided there is no
9 room for holding ponds .
10
11 Urbia advised that a redevelopment plan is being drafted for
12 the CUB store and topographical maps are still needed.
13
14 Regarding the community center, Urbia stated that Request for
15 Proposals have been sent to five well known architectural
16 firms . Also, a space needs analysis is being compiled .
17
18 C . Commissioner Gondorchin
19
20 May 13th is the tentative date selected for touring the
21 Hennepin County Burn Center . The Commissioner recommended that
22 anyone interest attending verify the date with Urbia .
23
24 D. Commissioner Murphy
25
0 6 Commissioner Murphy requested information regarding the house
7 on Silver Lake Road that was recently purchased by the City .
28
29 Urbia advised that the Fire Department will burn the house
30 down in the spring as a practice drill . The lot ' s availability
31 will be made known to developers . The City also has the option
32 of selling the lot directly if developers do not submit bids
33 which the Council feels are appropriate.
34
35 Commissioner Murphy advised that he received a memo from a
36 property owner on Skycroft . This property owner, who ' s home is
37 located adjacent to Central Park , expressed concern with
38 regard to water drainage and how it is being addressed in the
39 Sports Boosters development project . His specific concern
40 focused on the paved trail which is being considered in the
41 project . He wanted the Boosters to be sensitive to the
42 potential problems this paved trail may cause with regard to
43 water drainage .
44
45 Urbia responded that the Boosters have been rather inflexible
46 on this project , but the City has control as building permits
47 will be required from the City for this project .
48
49 Commissioner Murphy also felt that any work on the football
50 field will also impact on water drainage.
0
91 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
2 MARCH 16 , 1993
3 PAGE 10
4
5
6 E. Commissioner Werenicz
7
8 Commissioner Werenicz had nothing to comment on at this time.
9
10 F. Commissioner Madden
11
12 Commissioner Madden inquired if staff is aware of any activity
13 at the St . Anthony Lanes . Urbia responded he has not heard of
14 any activity at this bowling alley . He noted that the Public
15 Works Department receives calls regularly from Walker
16 residents . They are distressed with the appearance of the
17 property around the bowling alley as well as the vehicular
18 traffic driving through. Staff has suggested to the owners of
19 the bowling alley that it would be prudent to blockade the
20 area where traffic cuts through .
21
22 Commissioner Madden questioned if staff had considered
23 development if this building became vacant . Since staff is
24 unaware of the possibility of this vacancy, there was no
25 answer to this inquiry.
06
7 Commissioner Madden noted that the issue of an absention on a
28 vote was discussed at a recent Council meeting. The Council
29 directed staff to include its comments regarding an absention
30 vote in the Planning Commission by-laws .
31
32 Commissioner Madden stated he takes offense to this request
33 and he referred to Roberts ' Rules of Order regarding an
34 abstention . He also takes offense at the City Council revising
35 the Planning Commission ' s by-laws and protested that action.
36
37 Urbia noted that the revision was not made as he recognized
38 that it would be contrary to Robert ' s Rules of Order.
39
40 Commissioner Murphy inquired if the City Attorney was in
41 attendance at the meeting where the by-laws were revised.
42 Urbia did not recall his being in attendance .
43
44 Commissioner Madden wanted the record to reflect his protest
45 of the Planning Commission by-laws revision as approved by the
46 City Council as of January 12 , 1993 .
47
48 Chair Faust observed that the City Council may be requested to
49 rescind this action if this is the wish of the Planning
50 Commission .
0
•1 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
2 MARCH 16, 1993
3 PAGE 11
4
5
6 The Chair also felt it was illegal to force someone to vote.
7
8 Urbia suggested that if it desires , the City Council can
9 reconsider this action and staff can introduce new
10 information .
11
12 Chair Faust determined there is no need for a representative
13 o.f the Planning Commission to attend the April 13th Council
14 meeting.
15
16 Commissioner Franzese inquired how the neighborhood meetings
17 went for the proposed street improvements .
18
19 Urbia noted that all of the meetings were held on March 10th .
20 All affected property owners received letters of these
21 informational meetings each of which lasted about one hour in
22 length. At the next Council meeting, staff will be requesting
23 approval to go out for bids for these projects .
24
25 11 . ADJOURNMENT
6
7 Motion by Madden , second by Werenicz to adjourn the Planning
28 Commission meeting at 8 : 35 p.m.
29
30
31 Motion carried unanimously
32
33
34
35
36 Respectfully submitted,
37
38
39 Jo-Anne Student , Planning Commission Secretary
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
0