Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPL MINUTES 04181995 Meeting Sheet IIIIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII IIII IIII ioiuo Box: 19 Folder: PL MINUTES AND AGENDAS 1995 Document: PL MINUTES 04181995 1 CITY OF ST. ANTHONY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES 3 APRIL 18, 1995 4 I. CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. 5 The meeting was called to order and the Pledge of Allegiance was led by Chair Bergstrom at 6 7:00 P.M. 7, II. ROLL CALL. 8 Commissioners present: Bergstrom, Makowske, Gondorchin, Horst, Faust, Franzese, and 9 Thompson. 10 Commissioners absent: None 11 Also present: Michael Morrison, City Manager and Kim Moore-Sykes, Management 12 Assistant. 13 Chair Bergstrom asked if there were any additions or changes to the April 18, 1995 Planning 14 Commission agenda. There were none. III. APPROVAL OF MARCH 21, 1995 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES. Motion by Franzese, second by Thompson to approve the Planning Commission minutes of 17 March 21, 1995 with the following changes: 18 Page 5, Line 5: After house add "without variances". 19 20 Motion carried unanimously. 21 IV. DESIGNATE PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE TO COUNCIL'S APRIL 22 25, 1995 REGULAR MEETING. 23 Chair Bergstrom will represent the Planning Commission at the April 25, 1995 Council Meeting. 24 V. PUBLIC HEARINGS. 25 A. Property subdivision request for property located at 3220 - 29th Avenue N.E. 26 At 7:04 P.M., Chair Bergstrom opened the public hearing for a property subdivision request for 27 property located at 3220 - 29th Avenue N.E. 28 Management Assistant Kim Moore-Sykes explained the owner, Mildred Verkin, has submitted a 29 petition for property subdivision and a preliminary plat for consideration, to subdivide her 30 property at 3220-29th Avenue N.E. into five lots. Currently, there are three existing residential 01 structures, one of which will be removed in order to facilitate the subdivision of the property. 32 She stated the other two structures will remain, one on proposed Lot 1 and the other on proposed 33 Lot 4. The three remaining proposed lots will be built-to-suit. She indicated Lot 1 will have a Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 18, 1995 Page 2 1 resultant square footage of 11,177 square feet with an existing house. Lot 2 will have 9,338 2 square feet of vacant lot. Lot 3 will have 11,128 square feet of vacant corner lot. The ordinance 3 requires 11,000 square feet for corner lots. Lot 4 will have 12,266 square feet with an existing 4 house and Lot 5 will have 12,665 square feet of vacant lot. She reported staff recommends the 5 approval of the property subdivision of 3220 - 29th Avenue N.E. into five lots and the attached 6 preliminary plat. She indicated the City Attorney had a few questions and she had distributed a 7 letter from William Soth and also a response to those concerns from the surveyor, Mark Kemper. 8 Ms. Susan Kemper, representing Kemper& Associates, Inc., indicated the subdivision was now 9 in compliance with all the city codes and city attorney's concerns. 10 Paul Redlinger, Realtor, explained he had been.requested by the Verkins family, to come and 11 look at the property. He had suggested the property would increase in value if three new homes 12 were placed on the property along with two existing homes. He indicated the proposal complied 13 with the city codes and he felt this would be a great addition to the community. 14 Milton Johnson, 3216-29th Avenue, asked to see the preliminary plat. Commissioner Makowske 15 showed the plat to Mr. Johnson and other concerned residents. Mr. Johnson asked how high the houses would be and how they would be placed on the property. He also questioned who would be building the houses. 18 Chair Bergstrom indicated the houses would be built in accordance with building code. The 19 maximum height of the houses would be two-story with an elevation of 25 feet from the ground 20. to the eaves. He indicated Mr. Johnson would need to speak with Ms. Verkins regarding the 21 builder, as this was not a decision the Planning Commission is involved in. 22 Chair Bergstrom closed the public hearing at 7:16 P.M. 23 Commissioner.Faust inquired as to who had provided the preliminary plat. He also asked if all 24 the lots were buildable without variances. 25 Moore-Sykes indicated Kemper& Associates had provided the preliminary plat and that all lots 26 were buildable without variances. 27 Commissioner Gondorchin asked if the City Staff had verified the changes Kemper made in 28 response to the questions raised by City Attorney in respect to compliance with city code. 29 Moore-Sykes indicated Kemper had met with the City Staff with his original plat and the houses 30 did not meet all city codes. The City made it clear they did not want variances and Kemper redid 31 the plat using smaller homes and the plat does now conform with all city codes. '2 Commissioner Franzese noted it appeared on the application to the City that Lot 2 would require 33 a rear setback variance for a larger garage. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 18, 1995 Page 3 1 Ms. Kemper indicated at the time of submittal, this was a problem but the lot footage has since 2 been changed to accommodate the garage. 3 Moore-Sykes explained the application was submitted prior to the conversation advising Mr. 4 Kemper that all homes have to fit on the lots and are required to be within the required setbacks. 5 She indicated changes to Lot 2 had been discussed and changes were made so the garage would 6 fit. The statement on the application no longer applies. 7 Commissioner Makowske indicated his only concern with approval was to make sure it did not 8 create a potential need for variances. As long as this had been addressed, he was satisfied with 9 the plat. 10 City Manager Mornson indicated there is a potential that a variance could still be applied for 11 depending on the house size but staff would highly recommend against this as this is a new plat 12 that was created by the property owner. 13 Commissioner Horst explained he would abstain from conversation on this issue due to a 14 possible conflict of interest with Ms. Verkins. i5 In response to Commissioner Franzese, Moore-Sykes indicated the drainage plans had been 16 included on the preliminary plat and there appeared to be no problems with the plan. 17 Motion by Commissioner Gondorchin, second by Commissioner Thompson to recommend 18 Council approval of the property subdivision of 3220 - 29th Avenue N.E. into five lots and the 19 attached preliminary plat on the basis that all zoning ordinances are met, the title search and city 20 expense issues are brought to completion as outlined in the letter from William Soth of April 14, 21 1995, and all lots are platted and buildable according to City Code. 22 Vote: Commissioners Faust, Gondorchin, Franzese, Thompson, Bergstrom, Makowske voted 23 yes. Commissioner Horst abstained. 24 Motion carried. 25 Chair Bergstrom urged Ms. Verkins to attend the City Council meeting on April 25, 1995 for the 26 final commitment of her property subdivision request. 27 B. Sign variance request for Autotraac, 3009 - 37th Avenue N.E. 28 At 7:30 P.M., Chair Bergstrom opened the public hearing for a sign variance request for 29 Autotraac, 3009 - 37th Avenue N.E. 4R0 Management Assistant Moore-Sykes explained the owner,John Bulicz, is requesting a sign 31 variance to allow a second identification sign on a commercial building having only one right-of- I way frontage. She indicated the current ordinance only allows one sign per right-of-way frontage. She explained he is requesting an additional sign because his current sign is not readily W noticeable to anyone looking for his business. She indicated the linear footage allowed for the 4 sign by the sign ordinance, has the current Autotraac sign facing south and is clearly visible to 5 the residential area across the street. Mr. Bulicz is unable to install a ground sign on the site 6 because Ramsey County widened 37th Avenue at that point to accommodate a right turn lane 7 onto Silver Lake Road and eliminated the space he would have had available for a ground sign. 8 If the ground sign had been possible, the identification sign would be visible from both directions 9 along 37th Avenue and possibly at the intersection of Silver Lake Road and 37th Avenue. 10 Moore-Sykes explained Mr. Bulicz is asking to be allowed to paint an identifying wall sign on 11 the west side of the building which would be 14 feet by 5 feet or 65 square feet with an 8%wall 12 surface. This would be within the specifications of the sign ordinance regulating the size of wall 13 signs which limits a wall sign to no more than 15%of the wall surface. She indicated the 14 proposed identifying signage would be visible from the west-bound and the north-bound 15 roadways. She reported staff recommends approval of the sign variance. The hardships 16 addressed by this variance request are the inability to install a ground sign due to the construction 17 of a right turn lane for Silver Lake Road by Ramsey County and the current sign is ineffective in 18 providing a reasonable and equitable opportunity for identification of the business. 19 Commissioner Franzese asked if a ground sign could have been placed in the easement even if 20 Ramsey County hadn't widened the road. Morrison stated Autotraac could have put a ground sign there if Ramsey County had not widened the road because Autotraac owned the land. 23 Judy Fruth, Administrative Assistant of Autotraac, indicated the Berger Transfer building sits 24 further out into the street area than Autotraac. She stated customers driving west to east cannot 25 see Autotraac until they are right in front of the building. She indicated a lot of people have to 26 turn around and come back. She stated that in an attempt to distinguish their building from 27 Berger Transfer, they painted the building blue. She questioned how a small business can grow 28 when customers drive right by and think your business is something else. 29 Commissioner Gondorchin asked if there were many comments from customers in regard to the 30 inability to find,Autotraac. 31 John Bulicz, Owner of Autotraac, indicated he has worked at Autotraac since 1986 and numerous 32 customers have indicated they drove by the building and never knew it existed. He explained 33 when Autotraac was built, Berger Transfer did not exist. Subsequently, Berger Transfer was 34 built out ten feet further than Autotraac. He stated Autotraac was painted blue in an attempt to 35 be seen and the business to grow. They now are trying to grow again by being visible from both 36 streets. 37 Commissioner Thompson indicated he thought a more visible sign across the top of the building 038 would be more appropriate. He felt a wall sign would cheapen the look of the building. 40 Chair Bergstrom closed the public hearing at 7:41 P.M. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 18, 1995 Page 5 1 Commissioner Gondorchin indicated he was in favor of the variance request as it was within sign 2 surface regulation, the strict enforcement of the ordinance would cause a hardship as the plight 3 was not created by the land owner,these are unique circumstances to the individual, and it would 4 not alter the essential character of the locality. 5 Commissioner Faust indicated he had drove all ways around Autotraac and did not believe a sign 6 in this location would help traffic find the business. He felt it more appropriate to upgrade the 7 sign in the front of the building. He stated a wall sign was not the answer to the problem and 8 may even create a hazard to traffic traveling south on Silver Lake Road. He agreed the sign on 9 the front of the building was inadequate to identify the business and attract customers but 10 indicated he did not see the basis for hardship. 11 Chair Bergstrom agreed that being tucked back behind Berger Transfer and being located in the 12 middle of a block would cause an identifying problem for any business. He indicated a different 13 sign in the front of the building may help. 14 Commissioner Faust stated he did not believe a wall sign was the right approach and may be 15 more detrimental to the look of the building. WMr. Bulicz indicated his customers look for the sign on the top of the building and still drive 17 past. He indicated the color change of the building had helped but customers driving north on 18 Silver Lake Road still had no idea where the business was located. He asked if anyone present at 19 the meeting had difficulty locating Autotraac. 20 Commissioner Makowske stated he had difficulty finding Autotraac. He indicated before the 21 building had been painted blue, he assumed it was part of Berger Transfer. He indicated there 22 may be a hardship as according to the ordinance, light-industrial areas are allowed to have a wall 23 sign and a freestanding sign. Autotraac is unable to have a ground sign and would like to 24 continue to have as much signage as possible according to the ordinance. He stated this may be 25 one way to alleviate this problem. 26 Commissioner Horst indicated he agreed with Commissioner Gondorchin in regards to the 27 reasons they could and should grant the variance. He indicated signage is very important to 28 business and the business owner is the best to judge the solution to the problem. 29 Commissioner Faust confirmed that the area was zoned commercial and not light industrial. 30 Motion by Gondorchin, second by Bergstrom to recommend Council approval of the request for 31 a sign variance that would allow a second identifying commercial sign for Autotraac, 3009 - 37th 32 Avenue N.E. on the basis that it is within the sign surface regulation, the strict enforcement of the ordinance would cause a hardship as the plight was not created by the land owner, these are It unique circumstances to the individual, and it would not alter the essential character of the 35 locality. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 18, 1995 Page 6 1 Commissioner Franzese noted.the ordinance may also cause an economic hardship, as Rapid Oil 2 had a sign which was well lit and highly visible to the eye. 3 Commissioner Thompson again recommended the sign on the front of the building be improved. 4 Mr. Bulicz indicated for a sign to be highly visible on the front of the building it would have to 5 stick way out. He disagreed with improvement of the front sign and indicated a sign on the side 6 will help traffic from that direction identify the business. 7 Vote: Commissioners Gondorchin, Franzese, Thompson, Bergstrom, Horst, and Makowske 8 voted yes. Commissioner Faust voted naye. 9 Motion carried. 10 Chair Bergstrom urged Mr. Bulicz to attend the City Council meeting on April 25, 1995 for the 11 final commitment of his sign variance request. 12 C. Request for front and back yard setback variance and lot area variance for 3111 Silver 43 Lake Road. 14 At 7:52 P.M., Chair Bergstrom opened the public hearing for a front and back yard variance and 15 a lot area variance for 3111 Silver Lake Road. 16 Management Assistant Moore-Sykes explained this property was acquired as part of the St. 17 Anthony HRA program for scattered-site redevelopment. She indicated the same process was 18 initiated for 3112 Silver Lake Road in 1993. The two lots are the same size and Lang Beach'is 19 proposing to develop the 3111 Silver Lake Road property in the same manner. She stated 3111 20 Silver Lake Road is a platted and buildable lot. In order to build an updated,modern home, Mr. 21 Beach has petitioned for the following variances which will be required for the redevelopment of 22 the property. These same variances were approved for 3112 Silver Lake Road. A front yard 23 variance of fifteen feet; the ordinance requires 30 feet in the front yard setback. A back yard 24 variance of twelve feet; the ordinance requires 25 feet in the back yard setback. A lot area 25 variance of 440 square feet because it is a corner lot;the ordinance requires that corner lots have 26 an area of 11,000 square feet. This lot has 10,560 square feet. She explained the property has a 27 front yard setback of approximately 15 feet and in addition, there is a six foot right-of-way the 28 City owns. The structure will actually sit 21 feet from Townview Avenue and it's west side yard 29 will be 31 feet from Silver Lake Road. The back of the structure will be 13 feet from the 30 property line and abuts the side yard of the neighboring property. She indicated there are no 31 windows or doors on this side of the neighboring home. She stated staff recommends approval 32 of the variances as this lot has some of the same hardships that existed for the redevelopment of 3112 Silver Lake Road. The variances are needed for the redevelopment of a non-conforming lot 4 that is platted and buildable. The lot at 3111 Silver Lake Road is deemed non-conforming 35 because of the adoption of the City's zoning ordinances which require larger lot sizes. The Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes • April 18, 1995 Page 7 1 proposed house is of modern standards, which require additional total square footage and 2 different design considerations. 3 In response to Commissioner Makowske, Mornson indicated there had been unanticipated 4 problems with the property at 3112 Silver Lake Road because the City had purchased the 5 property and went through the process without a survey. With 3111 Silver Lake Road, the City 6 had demanded the owner provide a survey before they purchased the property. 7 In response to Franzese, Moore-Sykes indicated the size of the lot at 3111 Silver Lake Road was 8 identical to the lot size of 3112 Silver Lake Road. 9 Chair Bergstrom indicated he had looked at the lot and it did not appear the drainage shown on 10 the plat was correct. Moore-Sykes indicated drainage will be as indicated on this plat. 11 Larry Beach, Larry Beach Construction, indicated he had purchased the property at 3111 Silver 12 Lake Road from the HRA, knowing he would need the same variances as 3112 Silver Lake Road 13 had required. He.stated he would like to build the house as a pre-sold and he had received 14 numerous calls since his signs were in place. He indicated this is a realistic size house for the 15 area. He stated the shape of the house may change but the placement will remain approximately 06 1 the same. He indicated one option available was to move the house east away from Silver Lake 17 Road but Mrs. Moncada did not want the house moved east. He indicated he would like to keep 18 the garage on the west side to baffle the traffic noise from Silver Lake Road. This would also 19 keep the area on the east side more open for a play area. He indicated the variance request for 20 width was extremely important. 21 Commissioner Franzese suggested that since the house was not buyer specific, it may be more 22 appropriate to build a house not requiring a rear setback variance. She indicated the owner 23 would then be able to appreciate a back yard. She stated a home that conformed to the lot would 24 have a better appearance. 25 Mr. Beach stated he did not want to build a long narrow house. He stated the house could be 26 narrowed by a couple of feet but he was not sure if two feet would have much impact. He 27 indicated the home on 3112 Silver Lake Road, looks right down at the little house behind but that 28 it because the little house is one foot from the property line. There will be 24 feet between the 29 two houses in this development. He felt it worse to make the house longer and narrower as it 30 would encroach more upon Ms. Moncada's property and more windows would be facing her 31 property. 32 In response to Commissioner Horst, Mr. Beach stated the existing fence does belong to the 33 property and will be removed. 04 Commissioner Faust asked if there will be a deck on the property and if there will be a two or 35 three car garage. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes • April 18, 1995 Page 8 1 Mr. Beach indicated there will be a 2.5 car garage and there will be a deck on the east side, off 2 the kitchen. He indicated Mrs. Moncada had requested this placement so the owner won't be 3 standing doing dishes and staring into her yard. Mr. Beach stated he was open to all possibilities 4 and wanted to satisfy the City. He indicated he needed to have guidelines so he could inform 5 prospective purchasers of their limitations. He felt the type of home he was proposing would 6 match the existing homes on Townview. 7 In response to Chair Bergstrom, Mr. Beach indicated one-half the drainage would drain down the 8 property line to a natural ditch and one-half would drain towards the front out to Townview. He 9 indicated he did not think he would need much fill and he intended to keep the house low to 10 match the other houses in the area. 11 Commissioner Makowske explained there were three conditions which needed to be met in order 12 for the Planning Commission to grant a variance request. He indicated the first was that if the 13 variance were not granted it would cause an undue hardship. He asked Mr. Beach why this 14 would cause a hardship and not merely an inconvenience. 15 Mr. Beach stated the city owned an extra six feet of the lot. This was the reason for the house 16 being pushed further back on the lot. 17 Darrin Mercil, 2922 Townview, indicated he was glad the city had purchased the white home for 18 redevelopment of the property. He explained he was living in the house built at 3112 Silver Lake 19 Road last year. He stated that without the variances being granted, his house would have been 11 20 feet wide. He indicated the property is supposed to face Silver Lake Road but the city requested 21 that the property face Townview. He stated the position of the house is proper with young 22 children as it does not face the busy Silver Lake Road. He indicated the house could be no 23 narrower. His house is 38 feet wide and he had to have special plans drawn for the house as the 24 lot was too narrow. He stated he had requested the same variances last year for his home. He 25 stated he would like to see the correct house be put on the land. 26 Chair Bergstrom asked Mr. Mercil if he had received any complaints from the neighbors 27 regarding visible encroachment. 28 Mr. Mercil stated the neighbors were happy to see the yellow house gone. He has received only 29 compliments. 30 Commissioner Franzese asked Mr. Mercil to verify his lot was 160 feet deep and the square 31 footage of his home. She also stated this case was different. When Mr. Mercil approached the 32 Planning Commission, he had a specific site plan to suit his needs. With this proposal, there is 33 no purchaser requiring a specific style to suit their needs. 04 Mr. Mercil indicated his lot was 160 feet deep. He explained it was difficult to propose a home 35 to a person until you are aware of what the limitations are. He reiterated the city imposed the Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 18, 1995 Page 9 1 property face Townview. He reported the square footage of his home to the foundation is 1750 2 square feet. 3 In response to Commissioner Faust, Mr. Mercil indicated he had a two car garage and a second 4 story deck on the west side.of the house. 5 Mr. Beach indicated if the lot did not sell vacant as a pre-sold, he would like to construct the 6 house as shown in the preliminary plat. He has put a sign on the lot "build to suit" as he does not 7 like to build a house without a buyer. He stated the house on the preliminary plat will fit in well 8 with the neighborhood.. If he does not get a buyer, he would like to begin construction of the 9 house illustrated in the preliminary plat in six weeks. 10 Commissioner Horst asked Mr. Beach how many homes he had built in St. Anthony in the past 11 three years. 12 Mr. Beach reported he had built two other homes. One home had needed variances and the other 13 hadn't. 14 Ms. Carinna Moncada, 3107 Silver Lake Road, stated the lot at 3111 was 66 feet by 160 feet 0 which was the same size as all the other lots for two blocks in the area. She indicated she was 16 confused as to what made this such an exceptionally different lot. She stated she felt it was 17 exceptionally different if you are building a house which is 38 feet wide. She indicated the only 18 other house in the neighborhood that wide is the Mercil property. The average width of the 19 homes on the 66 foot lots is 25 feet. She asked why now there needs to be wider houses fitting in 20 a standard size lot. She indicated her concern with changing what was once a side-yard into a 21 back yard. She indicated the house will now be 12 feet from her backyard instead of 25 feet. 22 She stated the white house across the street next to 3112 Silver Lake Road is three feet from the 23 property line not one foot as reported earlier. She expressed her concern with the lack of privacy. 24 She stated in the diagrams she has seen there would be a kitchen breakfast nook facing out 25 toward her yard. She indicated she was concerned with the drainage problem as there was a 26 drainage problem with the last house that was built that has not yet been resolved. She asked the 27 Planning Commission to look very carefully at granting variances in the Village. She indicated 28 this was an older area and the lots were platted at one dimension. She expressed that trying to 29 build larger houses that require the granting of variances was probably not advisable. 30 Commissioner Franzese asked Ms. Moncada to realize the Planning Commission had no control 31 over the privacy issue and any home built on this lot will have windows facing her backyard. 32 In response to Commissioner Makowske, Ms. Moncada reported her lot was 66 feet by 160 feet, 33 the same as the other lots in the area. 4R4 Mr. GregCartalucca, 3105 Silver Lake Road, indicated he questioned the survey that had been q Y 35 performed. He reported the gentleman who performed the survey was looking for a stake and Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 18, 1995 Page 10 1 found Mr. Cartalucca's fence post and used it as the marker. He indicated this fence post was one 2 foot in from the property line. He expressed concern in regards to drainage. He reported since 3 the new home was built at 3919 - 31st, there has been a bad water problem. He stated he had 4 mentioned it to Larry Hamer before the final grading and it improved slightly but there is still 5 water in his garage and water four to six inches deep in Ms. Moncada's back yard. He questioned 6 if the proposed raise in the grade would make the problem worse. 7 Chair Bergstrom closed the public hearing at 8:30 P.M. 8 In response to Commissioner Makowske,,Momson reported the City did request the property to 9 face Townview instead of Silver Lake Road in an attempt to reduce congestion on Silver Lake 10 Road. The driveway is currently off Townview and the City did not want another driveway 11 added to Silver Lake Road. He indicated the survey will be double checked. 12 Commissioner Gondorchin indicated he was in favor of the project and that the survey issue 13 should be verified. He felt it very advantageous for the property to face Townview as it was 14 hazardous to pull out onto Silver Lake Road. He indicated 27 feet was a good amount of 15 distance between the two homes. He felt the builder had put a lot of effort in to be sure the 16 homeowners were not looking directly at the Moncada property. He felt the project would 187 increase the valuation of her home rather than decrease the value. 18 Commissioner Horst stated the Commission needs to look at housing and lots over the long term. 19 If houses are being built which are larger than the lot is designed to handle, the builder will be 20 asking for a variance. This may begin to happen more and more as the city is redeveloping. He 21 indicated his concern that if the City begins to grant variances to meet contemporary standards, 22 they may get away from the size houses the city has now. He indicated he didn't want to set a 23 trend that every new house would get a variance. He also indicated he believed the City 24 Engineer would handle the drainage problem. 25 Commissioner Faust indicated he felt mixed housing was good and would strengthen the area. 26 He didn't feel an 1800 square foot house was too large by today's standards. He indicated 27 feet 27 between the houses was a good distance. He felt this development would be an enhancement to 28 the city. He stated he saw no problem with the variance and that the builder needed to have 29 something solid in order to sell the house. 30 Commissioner Franzese indicated there was more of an issue than what would look good on the 31 lot. She indicated the Commission needed to look at the legal conditions for granting a variance. 32 She stated there was no reason to grant a variance as the lot was buildable without a variance. 33 Commissioner Faust stated he was not sure that the lot was buildable, with building ordinances as far as square footage, depths, and sizes of rooms. The resulting house would be long and 5 narrow and without the flow it may result in a public safety, fire hazard. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 18, 1995 Page 11 1 Commissioner Gondorchin indicated he saw granting the variance on the basis that this is a 2 redevelopment. This is a special procurement of a property the city wanted to redevelop. He 3 stated it is based on the same conditions as the Mercil property. 4 Commissioner Franzese stated that there was a buyer with the Mercil property. She indicated she 5 could not legally vote in favor of these variances. 6 Commissioner Horst indicated he was handicapped in as far as he was not involved in the 7 conversation of the Mercil home. He felt this was a different situation as the necessity for 8 variances for the Mercil property came aboutas it was not known that there was a six foot jog in 9 the property. He indicated 3111 is a buildable lot. He did not feel the Planning Commission had 10 the flexibility to grant variances on a convenience basis. He felt it was possible to work with a 11 buyer to design a house that would work on this property. 12 Commissioner Faust indicated that in regards to the public safety issue, it was the City's 13 responsibility to have the house face Townview. This would dictate the way the house faced and 14 justify the setback variances. He stated the lot was not legally buildable without the variances. 15 Commissioner Horst stated there was public testimony against the backyard variance. He 106 suggested since there is flexibility, the builder should try to stay in the guidelines as much as 17 possible. 18 Commissioner Gondorchin stated it was imperative that the home face Townview and not Silver 19 Lake Road. He indicated a few feet could be "chipped" away but it would not make a difference. 20 He felt the lot was not buildable without a variance. 21 Commissioner Horst agreed it is logical for the house to face Townview and it may require some 22 variance. He indicated he was having a difficulty in finding the hardship and wanted to be 23 certain it would satisfy the three criteria used as guidelines. 24 Commissioner Makowske indicated the Commission has to rely on the City's responsibility for 25 safety. It appears that for safety reasons,the house must face Townview. Given that fact, he felt 26 there was definitely a hardship. Without the variances, there would be an 11 foot wide house. 27 He stated it was questionable if the extent of the variances were necessary. Given the City's 28 recommendation to grant the variance and due to the fact that if less of a variance were granted, 29 the house would intrude more on the neighbor's property,he felt it best to recommend approval 30 of the variances. He stated it was also necessary to investigate the drainage and survey issues 31 further. 32 Commissioner Gondorchin stated that,without the variances the only possibility would be a long 4Ftubular home which would stretch from east to west and look very odd. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 18, 1995 Page 12 1 Commissioner Faust reiterated that he did see a hardship in regards to public safety. Therefore 2 he believed condition#I to be satisfied. He indicated condition#2 was satisfied, as the request 3 for variance was not based on a desire to increase the income potential but rather to try to put the 4 property to the best use in context with the good of the entire community. Condition#3 was also 5 met, as this hardship was not created by the person, but by the city ordinance. This is a unique 6 and unusual situation. 7 Commissioner Gondorchin indicated the placement of the house will enhance the appearance of 8 the corner by making it more open. 9 Commissioner Franzese indicated she does not see that the City is recommending the granting of 10 the variance due to safety issues. She also stated the City is calling this a buildable lot. She 11 indicated she would be unable to vote due to the ordinance and the State Statutes. 12 Motion by Faust, second by Gondorchin to recommend Council approval of the front yard 13 variance of fifteen feet; the ordinance requires 30 feet, backyard variance'of twelve feet; the 14 ordinance requires 25 feet, and the lot area variance of 440 square feet; the ordinance requires 15 11,000 square feet, for 3111 Silver Lake Road, on the basis the diagram and footprint presented 16 by Mr. Beach be followed as he presented it here, as there is an undue hardship due to the 0 physical surrounding shape, topography, and conditions of the parcel, the proposed variance is 18 based not exclusively on the desire to increase the value or the income of the potential parcel but 19 would correct extraordinary circumstances that apply to other properties in the vicinity or zoning 20 district, the difficulty in this hardship is due to City Ordinance, in regards to public safety this 21 would represent the best use of the property placement of the house versus placing it on Silver 22 Lake Road, verification of the survey of the parcel, drainage issue of property addressed by the 23 City Engineer, and the property cleared of any remaining non-conforming structures. 24 Vote: Commissioners Faust, Gondorchin, Thompson, Bergstrom, Horst, and Makowske voted 25 yes. Commissioner Franzese voted naye. 26 Motion carried. 27 28 Chair Bergstrom urged Mr. Beach to attend the City Council.meeting on April 25, 1995 for the 29 final commitment of his variance request. 30 VI. MISCELLANEOUS. 31 Management Assistant Moore-Sykes indicated she had researched the issue of canopy signage 32 and it appeared that due to the right-of-way issue in the ordinance, canopy signs are allowed. 33 She indicated Chapter 14, Section 1400.12, Subd. 2 discusses commercial and limited business signs that are permissible. Gas stations, according to (2) and then(1) of the same notation, are *5 allowed one identification sign for each right-of-way frontage per commercial establishment and 36 no more than 2 square feet of surface area per lineal foot of business frontage up to a maximum Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 18, 1995 Page 13 1 of 150 square feet. She indicated she had discussed this with Larry Hamer, City Engineer, and 2 he suggested this provided a"loophole" that allows identification signage on gas station 3 canopies. 4 In response to Commissioner Gondorchin, Moore-Sykes indicated there is still the issue of 5 maximum coverage. 6 A. Discussion of the Comprehensive Plan. 7 Chair Bergstrom indicated he had spoken with a representative of the Metropolitan Council 8 Local Government Planning Group and invited them to come and speak to the Commission 9 tonight regarding how comprehensive planning efforts in St. Anthony fit in with the larger 10 Metropolitan Council issues,the regional blueprint, and also the upcoming legislative issues the 11 Metropolitan Council is pushing specifically as they relate to the City of St. Anthony, and to 12 share some ideas on what other communities Planning Commissions are doing to be pro-active. 13 He reported the representative was unable to attend tonight's meeting but is planning to attend the 14 May 16, 1.995 Planning Commission meeting. 15 Commissioner Franzese asked if Chair Bergstrom had explored a membership in the Minnesota WPlanning Association. 17 Chair Bergstrom indicated he had not. He asked the Commissioners if they would be able to 18 attend a work session outside of the regular Planning Commission meetings. 19 In response to Commissioner Faust, Commissioner Makowske indicated he had attended the City 20 Council meeting on March 28, 1995 and asked them for their input as to a vision statement for 21 the City of St. Anthony. He reported the Council had recommended the Planning Commission 22 look at the Economic Task Force Plan. He indicated the Council did not suggest a specific 23 mission or vision statement. The Council did suggest pinpointing areas in the city which need to 24 be developed or redeveloped and work to encourage development in those areas. He stated that 25 technically the Economic Task Force should have reported to the Planning Commission but they 26 were by-passed. He indicated he would be available to attend one extra meeting per month, 27 assuming it was scheduled enough in advance. 28 Commissioner Horst indicated his schedule was very full until July. 29 Commissioner Franzese suggested inviting a representative of the Economic Task Force to a 30 work session. She indicated support for a motion for Chair Bergstrom to become a member of 31 the M.P.A. She stated she felt the Planning Commission was a reactive body rather than a pro- 32 active body. • Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 18, 1995 Page 14 1 Commissioner Gondorchin indicated he did not feel the M.P.A. was peculiar to the efforts of the 2 Planning Commission. He stated the M.P.A. was a generic body and would be a large 3 commitment of Chair Bergstrom's time. 4 Commissioner Faust indicated he felt the Planning Commission was a very pro-active body. He 5 mentioned the accomplishments the Commission had made such as redoing the sign ordinance, 6 reviewing all city ordinances, rezoning around the lake, etc. He stated he felt the Commission 7 needed to have a vision or a mission statement. He suggested it would be a good idea for all the 8 Commissioners to read and understand the Comprehensive Plan. He felt this was the first step to 9 any progress. He reported the South Anoka County Consortium is a group with members from 10 Fridley, Columbia Heights, and Hilltop, who have joined together to look at the problems in their 11 community and find a way to resolve them. This organization does have a mission statement, 12 dealing with issues such as integrity and cooperation. He indicated the Commission needed to 13 define the core values of the community and determine how these values relate to each person in 14 the community, from the business people to the children. 15 Chair Bergstrom stated he felt the Planning Commission,needed a job description so they would 16 have a working description of what they are supposed to do. He felt the Planning Commission's 17 responsibility was to crystalize some of the issues which were important and then involve other groups to address specific issues. He expressed concern that there was not enough time for this 19 process at the regular monthly meetings. He stated he had no specific target at this point, but 20 would like the group to develop a list and get input from other people. 21 Commissioner Gondorchin indicated he would be available to attend one work.session per 22 month. He felt it important to explore the findings of the Economic Task Force and to look at all 23 committees and gauge their effectiveness. 24 Chair Bergstrom indicated he felt there was a credibility issue with the City Council. He did not 25 believe they were opposed to the Planning Commission working with these committees but that 26 it just did not occur to them. 27 Morrison indicated he agreed with Chair Bergstrom. He suggested the Commission set a date in 28 June for a work session. He also suggested staff develop a draft of a job description for the 29 Planning Commission based on some of the Minnesota Statutes and a survey of'other cities. He 30 also suggested staff would supply the Commissioners with the Economic Task Force list. He 31 reported the Economic Task Force was no longer in existence. Their main purpose had been to 32 let the public know there was going to be some redevelopment in the community and there could 33 potentially be some city assistance for those redevelopments. 34 Chair Bergstrom stated he felt it important to redo the Comprehensive Plan as it is sixteen years 1W old. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 18, 1995 Page 15 1 Morrison indicated that some of the redevelopment that had occurred in the City would require 2 an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. 3 Chair Bergstrom indicated the Metropolitan Council is in the process of drafting rules which 4 would require all metro area municipalities to redo their Comprehensive Plans if they were done 5 before 1995. 6 Morrison indicated staff would, in the future,try to direct task forces, if relevant to the Planning 7 Commission, to the Planning Commission. 8 There was Commission consensus to schedule a work session for May 9, 1995 from 7:00 to 9:30 9 P.M. in Room 9. 10 Chair Bergstrom indicated he would like to invite a Metropolitan Council representative to share 11 some ideas with the Commission. He indicated they could be in attendance for 45 minutes and 12 the balance of the work session would be used to brainstorm. 13 Motion by Franzese, second by Makowske to designate Chair Bergstrom to be the representative 14 of the Minnesota Planning Association. 0 15 In response to Morrison, Chair Bergstrom indicated he would like to have copies of the 16 Economic Task.Force findings distributed to the Commissioners as soon as possible. He felt the 17 Commission currently had adequate information regarding a job description. 18 Morrison suggested the Commission look at all the pieces of information they had regarding*a 19 job description and put them together into one document which could then be given to the City 20 Council. 21 Vote: Commissioners Franzese, Thompson, Bergstrom, and Makowske voted yes. 22 Commissioners Faust, Gondorchin, and Horst abstained. 23 Motion carried. 24 B. Commissioners Reports. 25 Commissioner Gondorchin asked if there had been any progress with the trailer court. 26 Morrison reported their were some interested persons. He stated that once the area near the 27 Kentucky Fried Chicken is resolved, the trailer court will be the next logical step. sp Commissioner Gondorchin inquired as to the status of the Old Clark Station property. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 18, 1995 Page 16 1 Morrison indicated this property is zoned residential. He indicated there had been one developer 2 who expressed interest in the property for a three-unit development. There had also been 3 someone considering the property for office use, which would require a rezoning, but that had 4 been dropped. 5 In response to Commissioner Gondorchin, Morrison indicated he was not aware of funds the 6 Sports Boosters had available that was to be used in Central Park for changing the ballfields, but 7 that he would research that item. He assumed the funds had been redirected toward other 8 expenditures. 9 Chair Gondorchin inquired if there were plans to install sidewalks in the City. He indicated he 10 thought there had been seven sights designated and he though one of those sites was located in 11 Central Park. 12 Morrison indicated a sidewalk on 33rd from Stinson to the high school was still pending. He 13 reported there were no other future plans for sidewalks due to the cash flow situation. 14 In response to Chair Gondorchin, Morrison reported First Bank will be obtaining ownership of Apache Mall within two weeks. First Bank will continue to retain Welsh Cos. to manage the property. Welsh Cos. is in the process of research to devise a plan for redevelopment for the best 17 use of the property. 18 Commissioner Franzese reported of her exchange with a contact at M.C.D.A. which may have 19 exciting possibilities. She had advised him to contact City Manager. She indicated M.C.D.A. 20 has the capability of putting funding into projects and moving clients outside of the Minneapolis 21 boundaries. 22 Commissioner Franzese reported that all the federal funds available for HUD Housing for the 23 first two quarters had been allocated. In regards to the legislature, Commissioner Franzese 24 reported that there was a possibility of severely delimiting tax increment financing, a movement 25 to have a flat property tax which would mean no property tax increase next year, and a 26 movement to do away with tax-free government issue bonds. 27 Commissioner Franzese indicated she would like to make some corrections to the March 28, 28 1995 City Council Meeting Minutes in regards to legislative updates. Morrison indicated these 29 minutes had been approved and advised Commissioner Franzese to put her corrections in written 30 form, as an addendum, and submit to City Staff. 31 In response to Commissioner Franzese, Morrison indicated Erling Weiberg was only interested in 32 being a member of the Rice Creek Watershed Task Force, not a member of the Board. 0 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 18, 1995 Page 17 1 Commissioner Franzese reported of a possible source of non-profit funds was through a group 2 called the Lamplighters. She also commented on the possibility of broadcasting School District, 3 Planning Commission and City Council meetings on cable television. 4 Commissioner Thompson reported his attendance at "Beyond the Basics" on April 6th. He 5 indicated Bruce Melkerson, Attorney presided over the meeting all day. He stated it was a very 6 informative meeting. 7 Commissioner Horst reported that Friday, April 21 st will be Dr. Kirk's last day. He indicated 8 there will be a new optometrist, Todd Larson. He encouraged all Commissioners to attend the 9 farewell party at 5:00 P.M. on Friday. 10 Morrison requested clarification on the Beach Variance for 3111 Silver Lake Road. It was 11 verified that the preliminary plat proposed must be used, or a plat of less size. 12 C. Management Assistant Reports. 13 Management Assistant Kim Moore-Sykes reported the Volunteer Appreciation Dinner will be held Thursday, April 20, 1995 at 6:30 P.M. at Donatelles in Moundsview. She stated the speaker 164 will be Larry Bodahl. 16 Moore-Sykes reported of some of the issues which will be addressed at the upcoming Planning 17 Commission meeting. She indicated Bruce Nedegaard is proposing to rezone and do some 18 replatting to build six twinhomes near Evergreen Townhomes. This may require a variance. The 19 staff will be meeting with him in regards to the preliminary plat. He would also like,to have two 20 single family homes in that area, one of which will be the Schroeder home. She reported Arnie 21 Gregory is proposing to develop the Makowske property. He is looking to replat and build 22 townhomes in this area. This will-require rezoning and variances. She stated they have reduced 23 the density for this project. 24 Morrison indicated both developers will be asking for Tax Increment Financing. He reported 25 there are legislative changes for tax increment financing and the Council will be adopting a 26 resolution at their next meeting and a public hearing will be held on May 27th,to amend their tax 27 increment budget. This will allow the City to spend any available increment from existing 28 districts properties as long as they identify the property. As part of the law, the Planning 29 Commission has to review that budget. 30 Moore-Sykes reported that City Staff and City Council has been working on an adult use 31 ordinance. The City Attorney is in the process of drafting an ordinance. She explained that as it 32 has to do with zoning,the Planning Commission will be reviewing that also. 1*33 Morrison explained the ordinance will help to control where these facilities can be located in the 34 City. He indicated the public hearing will be held on May 16th. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 18, 1995 Page 18 1 VII. ADJOURNMENT. 2 Motion by Horst, second by Makowske to adjourn the meeting at 10:15 P.M. 3 Motion carried unanimously. 4 Respectfully submitted, 5 Lorri Kopischke 6 TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial