Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPL MINUTES 10201998 Meeting Sheet IIIIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIIIIIIIII ioosn Box: 19 Folder: PL MINUTES AND AGENDAS 1998 Document: PL MINUTES 10201998 I CITY OF ST. ANTHONY 02 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 3 OCTOBER 20, 1998 4 I. CALL TO ORDERIPLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. 5 The meeting was called to order at 7:00 P.M. followed by the Pledge of Allegiance led by Chair 6 Bergstrom. 7 II. ROLL CALL. 8 Commissioners present: Chair Bergstrom; Commissioners Gondorchin, Horst, Kaczor, 9 Makowske, and Thompson. 10 Commissioners absent: None. 11 Also present: Kim Moore-Sykes, Management Assistant. 12 III. APPROVAL OF OCTOBER 20, 1998 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA. 13 Motion by Gondorchin, second by Makowske to approve the October 20, 1998 Planning 14 Commission Meeting Agenda with the following addition: 15 16 Following Item V, before Item VI: Comments from Mr. Doug Jones with regard to the storm 17 water ordinance. 18 Motion carried unanimously. 19 IV. APPROVAL OF SEPTEMBER 15, 1998 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 20 MINUTES. 21 Motion by Kaczor, second by Makowske to approve the September 15, 1998 Planning 22 Commission Meeting Minutes with the following changes: 23 Page 5, line 6, change "Szurak" to "Seurek" 24 Page 6, line 31, insert "he thought" between "Wagner stated" and "Mr. Krier had not left the 25 City" 26 Motion carried unanimously. 27 28 V. DESIGNATION OF PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE TO THE CITY 29 COUNCIL. 30 Commissioner Horst agreed to attend the October 27, 1998 City Council meeting. 31 Comments from Doug Jones with regard to the storm water ordinance. 32 Bergstrom welcomed Doug Jones, 2505 Silver Lane,to address the Commission with his 33 comments on the proposed ordinance. He added Mr. Jones was unable to stay at the meeting until this topic was addressed on the agenda. 36 Mr. Jones reviewed his comments on the proposed storm water ordinance. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes October 20, 1998 Page 2 1 "Purpose" - Mr. Jones stated he believes the first sentence should be re-worded. Mr. Jones added 2 he would wish to add "to reduce the surface water run-off and mitigate flooding in our 3 community by controlling surface water runoff on site when possible." 4 5 "Plan Review Procedure" - Mr. Jones stated he believes the Public Works Director should not 6 make decisions with regard to commercial or industrial development, adding such items should 7 be reviewed by the City'ssurface water engineer or contracted engineering firm. 8 9 Mr. Jones stated concerned members of the community are unable to remain part of the process if 10 they are not notified of public hearings and meetings with regard to the storm water ordinance. 11 He added he would like a notification be sent to a representative of the Homeowner's 12 Association informing them of any public hearings for variances. 13 14 Mr. Jones stated, for example, the Association members were not notified of the review of the 15 Freedom gas station, and the community needs to be made aware so concerns can be addressed 16 before they become a problem. 17 "Landscape" - Mr. Jones stated it should be added that landscaping must be finished and approved be the Public Works Director before a project will be released, again citing the 20 Freedom gas station. He added he would wish a section under this heading for regulation of the 21 configuration of property to minimize surface water runoff. 22 23 "Duration" - Mr. Jones stated all written extensions should be subject to modifications made to 24 the storm water ordinance during the 1 year duration. He added if the ordinance is changed, all 25 legitimate extensions would be subject to the changes made to the ordinance by the City Council 26 and Planning Commission. 27 28 "Fees" -Mr. Jones stated a graduated fee schedule should be utilized instead of a flat fee of$150. 29 He added if a site plan modification triggered a review by surface water management engineers, 30 fees would also be added. 31 32 "Design Standards" - Mr. Jones stated it is necessary to specify that proposed designs will meet 33 NERD standards. 34 35 "Definitions" -Mr. Jones stated there should be definitions added for "best management plan", 36 "detention basin", "shoreline zone" and "erosion". He added these definitions are available in the 37 Rice Creek Watershed District's water management plan. 38 39 Mr:Jones stated the Homeowner's Association members feel strongly that a recommendation 0should be made to restrict the application of phosphorus fertilizers to lawns within the City. He 41 added that chemical lawn treatment companies must apply to the City for a working permit, and Planning Commission Meeting Minutes October 20, 1998 • Page 3 1 the City could specify in the permit that phosphorus treatments would not be allowed. 2 3 Bergstrom thanked Mr. Jones for his comments, adding a memo had been received from WSB 4 that afternoon with their review of the draft ordinance. 5 VI. PUBLIC HEARING. 6 1. 98-10 Variance to Sideyard Setback at 3125 Roosevelt Street. 7 Kim Moore-Sykes introduced Mary Silberschmidt, 3125 Roosevelt Street, who has submitted a 8 - request for a sideyard setback-variance of two feet to allow for the extension of a proposed deck 9 that will connect with steps that already exist on the south side of her home and make them part 10 of the proposed deck. Currently, the cement steps are consistently used as egress and ingress 11 from a door on this side of the house. They extend approximately 5 feet 6 inches from the 12 structure but are also 3 feet 6 inches into the sideyard setback. The steps are proposed to be 13 renovated and resituated to face east as part of the proposed deck project. There is a 7-foot 14 sideyard setback on this side of the house. 15 16 Ms. Silberschmidt's home was constructed in 1960, sixteen years before the City's Zoning Ordinance was adopted. She has indicated to Staff that the steps have not been repaired since they were constructed and as such are in need of repair. Her house is situated facing west with 19 her kitchen on the south end and it is from the kitchen that the door opens onto the steps in 20 question. 21 22 There are two issues resultant from Ms. Silberschmidt's proposed plan to reconstruct these steps 23 so that they will be more usable and safer and to connect the steps to the proposed deck 24 construction project. The first issue concerns the reconstruction or repair of a nonconforming 25 structure. In this situation,the steps currently are partially situated in the sideyard setback. 26 Section 1660.02, Subdivision 1., Existing Structure, of the City Ordinance states that no structure 27 used for a nonconforming use may be enlarged, extended,reconstructed, replaced or moved 28 except to change it to a conforming use. The steps are considered an allowed nonconforming 29 structure according to Section 1600.03 because they were in existence prior to the adoption of the 30 City's Zoning Ordinance. To be in compliance with the City's Ordinance, Ms. Silberschmidt has 31 the following options: she can reconstruct the steps to descend 2.5 feet from the house within a 2 32 foot space, which would create a more dangerous and less accessible exit or entrance to her 33 home; to renovate her kitchen so as to remove the door, thereby eliminating her ability to exit her 34 home from the south; or not use the door, again restricting an access or exit to her home. 35 36 - While she stated she is interested in correcting the non-conforming situation that was created 37 when the City's Ordinance was approved in 1976, which placed her steps in the sideyard setback, 38 the above-stated options do not allow her to continue to use her property as it was originally 0 constructed or to its greatest use. Ms. Silberschmidt's inability to satisfactorily correct the 40 situation is, to some degree, the result of a hardship created by the adoption of the City's Zoning Planning Commission Meeting Minutes • October 20, 1998 Page 4 1 Ordinance. 2 3 The second issue is that the proposed deck plan calls for the steps to be incorporated into the 4 design so that the end result is a deck structure that comes around to the side of the house to 5 connect with the steps. The property owner stated that this will provide continuity, accessibility 6 and usability of the steps and deck but this plan also requires a 2-foot variance, as the deck will 7 then extend into the sideyard setback as well. 8 9 Ms. Silberschmidt is requesting that her application for a variance to the City's Zoning 10 Ordinance be granted because the undue hardship was not created by her as the property owner, 11 but by the-adoption of the Zoning Ordinance in 1976. By repairing the steps and making them 12 part of the proposed deck, she is trying to correct an extraordinary circumstance by reducing the 13 size of the steps by 1.5 feet, thereby mitigating the impact of the existence of a nonconforming 14 use. The property owner feels that by being asked to comply with the full extent of the 15 Ordinance, she would be unduly restricted in the use of her property. 16 17 No one contacted the City Staff to voice any objections or concerns. Gondorchin stated he had driven by the property in question and it appears the proposed 20 construction has already been completed. He asked when the request for variance had been 21 made. 22 23 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated Ms. Silberschmidt stated she would not begin construction until the 24 variance was granted; however, due to weather concerns with regard to damage to materials and 25 constructing footings, City Staff suggested to Ms. Silberschmidt that she could construct the 26 proposed deck up to the sideyard setback and to be continued upon approval of the variance by 27 the City. She agreed it appeared the construction had been completed. She added the Building 28 Inspector had been made aware of the situation. 29 30 Bergstrom invited Ms. Silberschmidt to address the Commission, and answer questions. 31 32 Ms. Silberschmidt stated the building materials had been ordered before she learned a variance 33 would be necessary. She stated she asked City Staff whether the City would permit her to build 34 in the setback before the variance was granted, and she was informed the Building Inspector . 35 would need to make that decision. 36 37 Ms. Silberschmidt stated the Building Inspector approved all the footings, including those within 38 the setback in question. She added she was acting in good faith but was under time and weather 39 constraints. She stated if the variance is not approved she will tear out the construction on the 0sideyard setback. 41 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes • October 20,A 998 Page 5 1 Ms. Silberschmidt pointed out the new construction extends less distance into the setback than 2 the steps and shed which were there previously. 3 4 Wagner asked whether Ms. Silberschmidt had obtained a building permit, which would have 5 specified the need for a variance. Ms. Silberschmidt confirmed she had applied for a building 6 permit in September, at which time she began the variance request process. 7 8 Makowske asked whether other exits from the home exist. Ms. Silberschmidt stated there are 4 9 exits:-from the west; into the garage; from the east; and from the south through the kitchen. 10 Makowske asked whether the property had any unusual grading or contours. Ms. Silberschmidt I 1 stated there is a hill in the backyard. 12 13 Bergstrom asked whether Ms. Silberschmidt had spoken with her neighbors with regard to the 14 proposed construction. Ms. Silberschmidt confirmed she had informed all of her neighbors of 15 her plans with the exception of the neighbor affected by the variance, who was unreachable 16 despite various attempts. Ms. Silberschmidt added she was able to stop this neighbor in her 17 driveway and requested her input, and the neighbor indicated her only concern was how the �8 setback variance would affect the opinion of prospective buyers upon the resale of her house. �j Ms. Silberschmidt stated the neighbor indicated no concern of her own. Ms. Silberschmidt 20 instructed her neighbor to contact the Planning Commission with any issues or concerns. 21 22 Wagner pointed out Ms. Silberschmidt's neighbor would have received a copy of the variance 23 request. 24 25 Bergstrom closed the public hearing at 7:36 P.M. 26 27 Bergstrom stated the request seems consistent with the revitalization of housing stock which the 28 Planning Commission wishes to encourage. Wagner stated while the variance has a good chance 29 of being granted based on the information available, it was very unfortunate that Ms. 30 Silberschmidt commenced construction without waiting for the variance request to be granted. 31 He added the possible weather effects on construction materials was a not an acceptable reason 32 for noncompliance with the City's ordinance. 33 34 Ms. Silberschmidt stated the main cause for concern was the digging of the footings in cold 35 weather, and she had never indicated otherwise. Wagner agreed the contractor would not have 36 wanted to extend construction into November. He added the request for variance seems to be a 37 valid one. 38 39 Makowske asked whether the sideyard variance is limited to a particular point. Ms. Moore- Sykes stated the variance applies to structure. 41 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes October 20, 1998 • Page 6 1 Horst stated there did not seem to be malice of intent as evidenced by Ms. Silberschmidt's 2 willingness to remove the construction if the variance was not granted. 3 4 Motion by Makowske, second by Kaczor to recommend approval to the City Council of the 5 setback variance of 2 feet to the property at 3125 Roosevelt Street as it will relieve undue 6 hardship and is consistent with the revitalization of existing housing stock. 7 Motion carried unanimously. 8 Bergstrom stated the request will be recommended to the City Council for approval at their 9 October 27, 1998 meeting and encouraged Ms..Silberschmidt to attend that meeting. Wagner 10 reiterated that the City Council does not look favorably upon requests from residents who ignore 11 the need for permission before commencing construction. 12 VII. OTHER BUSINESS. 13 1. Report from the Parks Commission. 14 Bergstrom welcomed Paul Louiselle, Parks Commissioner, who reviewed the Parks 0 5 Commission's October 8, 1998 meeting at which the reconstruction of Silver Point Park was 6 discussed. Mr. Louiselle stated Peter Willenbring, WSB, was in attendance at that meeting to 17 present WSB's recommendation of the removal of excavated material from Silver Point Park 18 rather than stockpiling the material in Central Park as was previously discussed, due to cost 19 effectiveness. 20 21 Mr. Louiselle stated the stockpiling option represented a savings of$200,000 to the City; 22 however, additional costs would be incurred through damage repair to the parking lot and the 23 grading of the stockpiled material. He added these additional costs,together with the 24 inconvenience of the stockpile, drove the decision to remove the.excavated material. 25 26 Mr. Louiselle stated WSB had received 9 bids, all from reputable contractors, and the 27 recommended bidder was Richard Knutson, Inc., for the Silver Point Park project. 28 29 Mr. Louiselle stated the Parks Commission will be designating a subcommittee to focus on the 30 selection of playground equipment for Silver Point Park. 31 32 Mr. Louiselle stated WSB had requested permission from the County to use Highway 88 for 33 excavation access to the park which would be less disruptive to residents near the park. He 34 added the request had been denied but the Parks Commission had been advised to resubmit their 35 request. Wagner confirmed the request for access to Silver Point Park from Highway 88 had 36 been approved by the County. 38 Bergstrom asked whether a construction schedule had been discussed. Mr. Louiselle stated Planning Commission Meeting Minutes October 20, 1998 • Page 7 1 construction would begin in early November. Wagner stated the contract had been awarded and 2 construction would begin as soon as the contractor could start. 3 4 Kaczor asked whether the Parks Commission had any new information on the sale of the 5 Salvation Army camp. Mr.Louiselle stated the issue was discussed but no new information was 6 available. He added the Parks Commission recommended the utilization of the land for parks 7 expansion. 8 2. Review Comments from WSB and RCWD re: Erosion Control 9 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated the City Attorney's comments regarding the erosion control storm water 10 ordinance had been distributed to the Commission along with a memo from WSB with their 11 comments which had just been received from the City that day. She added a copy of the draft 12 ordinance had been forwarded to the Rice Creek Watershed District for their comments, but to 13 date no response had been received by the City. 14 15 Bergstrom stated the City Council has requested the Planning Commission arrive at a consensus 16 draft ordinance to be presented to the Council at the October 27, 1998 regular City Council meeting. Bergstrom expressed his concern that the Commission would be pressed to arrive at a consensus before the Council meeting. 19 20 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated the first scheduled reading of the proposed ordinance is November 10, 21 1998 which is before the next Planning Commission meeting. She added Todd Hubmer, WSB, 22 indicated he would wish the ordinance to refer back to the storm water management plan in case 23 there are any alterations to the plan, and the memo from WSB reflects this recommendation. 24 25 Bergstrom reiterated it would be difficult for the Commission, having just received WSB's 26 comments, to arrive at a consensus before October 27, 1998. Ms. Moore-Sykes stated there will 27 be 3 readings of the proposed ordinance: November 10,November 24, and December 7. She 28 added the Commission's comments could be presented at the November 24 City Council meeting 29 before the 2nd reading of the proposed ordinance. 30 31 Bergstrom asked whether there was a regulatory deadline for having the ordinance in place. Ms. 32 Moore-Sykes stated there is no such deadline. Wagner stated it was permissible to introduce 33 changes at the 2nd reading. He added he would wish to consider the points made by Mr. Jones. 34 35 Bergstrom stated he presented the Planning Commission's recommendations for the proposed 36 ordinance to the City Council 3 weeks ago, and at that time, Councilmember Cavanaugh 37 suggested the Planning Commission arrive at a consensus before presentation to the City 38 Council. He added this is an opportunity for the Commission to provide a substantive ordinance. 40 Gondorchin stated the phosphorus restriction issue is a difficult one. Horst stated lawn chemical Planning Commission Meeting Minutes October 20, 1998 • Page 8 1 restrictions are not enforceable, and questioned the timing of accepting comments from Mr. 2 Jones earlier in the meeting. Bergstrom stated the Commission's meetings are public and such 3 input is welcomed. 4 5 Horst asked whether the upcoming public hearings would have been a more acceptable format, 6 adding the such comments delay process and diminish the function of the Commission. 7 Bergstrom disagreed, and stated such comments are solicited by City Staff. Ms. Moore-Sykes 8 confirmed that issues such as this are important to the community and such comments could 9 be incorporated into the proposed draft. She added Mr. Jones phoned the City Manager and 10 asked to be on the agenda. 11 12 Bergstrom asked whether a public hearing is required for a new ordinance. Ms. Moore-Sykes 13 stated the readings are public hearings, and are noticed in the City bulletin so residents who wish 14 to comment have 3 opportunities to do so. 15 16 Horst stated phosphorus free fertilizer products are available but limited. Bergstrom stated WSB 17 recommends finding out whether such products are available before recommendation to the City Council. Gondorchin stated a no phosphorus policy is restrictive and not enforceable. He added it is not accurate to say phosphorus is the only cause of water problems in Silver Lake. 20 A question was raised by an audience member with regard to the appropriate forum for raising 21 questions with regard to the storm water ordinance. Bergstrom reiterated that the meetings are 22 open to the public and comments are welcome at any time. He added that 4 documents are now 23 in circulation regarding this issue: the Metropolitan Council's model ordinance; the Planning 24 Commission's memo to the City Council with its comments; the City Attorney's comments; and 25 WSB's memo of October 20, 1998. 26 27 Bergstrom stated the Planning Commission will attempt to combine all these documents into one 28 representative document to be presented for discussion at its next meeting. 29 VIII. COMMENTS. 30 Gondorchin thanked the Commissioners for their letters of support to the City Council in favor of 31 his reinstatement to the Commission. 32 33 Kaczor apologized for his late arrival at this evening's meeting. He stated he had noticed a 34' dumpster which was issued for the Smart Stop at 33rd and Stinson is outside every day. He 35 added the dumpster should only be out on garbage day in compliance with the dumpster permit. 36 Ms. Moore-Sykes agreed to look into the issue. 37 Kaczor asked whether any new information was made available to City Staff with regard to the 39 sale of the Salvation Army Camp. Wagner stated the Salvation Army is still investigating the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes October 20, 1998 Page 9 1 possibility of selling the land, and nothing can be done until the City knows whether the property 2 is available. 3 4 Makowske asked for clarification with regard to the current owners of Exhaust Pro. Ms. Moore- s Sykes stated the property is under lease from the owner to Mr. Brian Palmer who also runs a U- 6 Haul business from the property. She answered she believes the conditional use permit applies 7 only to the automotive repair portion of the business. 8 9 Thompson stated he was pleased to note Saturday bus service on Silver Lake Road had been 10 restored. He added a beautiful new home had been constructed in his neighborhood which 11 exemplifies the need for new homes on vacant lots. 12 13 Horst reminded the Commission of the November 5, 1998 meeting with Mr. Dick Krier from 14 6:30 -9:00 P.M. He added the St. Anthony Shopping Center Merchant's Association had a 15 productive meeting with Mr. Krier on Monday October 19, 1998. Bergstrom encouraged the 16 Commission's attendance at the November 5, 1998 meeting with Mr. Krier. 17 S98 Ms. Moore-Sykes reminded the Commission of the November 4, 1998 City Council worksession at which Opus is scheduled to give an update on Apache Plaza. 20 IX. ADJOURNMENT. 21 Motion by Horst, second by Makowske to adjourn the meeting at 8:44 P.M. 22 Respectfully submitted, 23 Mary Mullen 24 TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.