HomeMy WebLinkAboutPL MINUTES 06202000 Meeting Sheet
IIIIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII IIII IIII
100716
Box: 19
Folder: PL MINUTES AND AGENDAS 2000
Document: PL MINUTES 06202000
1 CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
2 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
JUNE 20, 2000
04 7:00 p.m.
5 CALL TO ORDER.
6 The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m.
7 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
8 Chair Bergstrom invited the Commission and audience to join in the Pledge of Allegiance.
9 ROLL CALL.
10 Present: Chair Bergstrom; Commissioners Tillmann, Hanson, Thomas,
11 Melsha, Hatch, and Stille.
12 Commissioners absent: None.
13 Also present: Spencer A. Isom, Assistant City Manager.
14 CONSIDERATION, DISCUSSION, AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON ALL OF THE
15 FOLLOWING ITEMS:
16 None.
17 I. PUBLIC INPUT.
Chair Bergstrom invited anyone from the audience to provide general input to the Planning
Commission. Hearing no response, Chair Bergstrom moved forward with the Agenda.
20 II. MINUTES.
21 Motion by Tillmann,second by Melsha,to approve the May 16,2000 Planning Commission meeting
22 minutes with the following changes.
23 Page 3, Line 19, change"Stille"to "Melsha."
24 Page 11, Line 7, change"watershed"to"renovation of older homes."
25 Motion carried unanimously.
26 III. COMMUNICATION FROM CITY COUNCIL.
27 None.
28 IV. REQUESTS FOR POSTPONEMENTS OR WITHDRAWALS OF APPLICATIONS.
29 None.
30 V. NEW APPLICATIONS/PUBLIC HEARINGS.
31 1. Public Hearing,4004 Fordham Drive Lot Width and Lot Area Variance Request.
32 Chair Bergstrom opened the Public Hearing at 7:05 p.m. Bergstrom requested a report from
33 Staff.
0 Assistant City Manager Spencer Isom reviewed for the Commission that David and Pauletta
35 Sperry were again seeking a variance for their property at 4004 Fordham Drive. The
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
June 20, 2000
Page 2
•
1 Commission and City Council have previously heard(May 18 and May 25, 1999) and granted the
2 Sperry's request for a variance. However,the variance has expired because the variance is only
3 in effect for one year. City Attorney Soth has advised Staff that the Sperry's must complete a
4 new Petition for variance and begin the process anew. A Concept Review on this matter was
5 held at the May 16, 2000 Planning Commission Meeting.
6 Chair Bergstrom invited Mr. and Mrs. Sperry to address the Commission. Mr. Sperry, 4004
7 Fordham Drive, said he was in attendance to ask for a lot width and area variance and reiterated
8 that the issue had been reviewed at an earlier Planning Commission meeting in May 2000. Mr.
9 Sperry presented a depiction of the proposed plan and he reviewed in detail for the Commission
10 the specific plans in mind.
11 Melsha inquired if Mr. Sperry had received additional neighborhood input from last year about
12 the project. Mr. Sperry stated that he had not received any objections.
13 Bergstrom thanked Mr. Sperry and invited anyone else in the audience to speak.
14 In that respect, Bob Graham, 4024 Fordham Drive, addressed the Commission and mentioned
15 that the City Council had made a promise not to issue variances until the flooding issue has been
16 resolved. He mentioned that the Commission had issued several variances since that time and he
was concerned about the health and safety of the residents when heavy rains are experienced and
8 flooding has occurred.
19 Jeff Amolds,4009 Shamrock Drive, would like for the Sperrys to keep in mind a water
20 management plan for the stormwater runoff. He stated that he hoped that the Sperrys would
21 possibly implement some landscaping to help resolve any pooling of water.
22 Asking for any additional input from the audience and hearing none, Chair Bergstrom closed the
23 Public Hearing at 7:14 p.m.
24 Chair Bergstrom asked for comments from the Commissioners.
25 Thomas commented that the Planning Commission has addressed the flooding issue. Bergstrom
26 commented that the Planning Commission has been asking residents to infiltrate the water runoff
27 into their yards to help alleviate the storm water issue. Bergstrom said the City is going to great
28 lengths in constructing and redesigning the City's stormwater runoff to move away from the City,
29 but at this time, the City is requesting that residents try to direct the stormwater into yards.
30 Bergstrom acknowledged that the variance request of the Sperrys had been previously approved,
31 and basically the request before the Planning Commission was an extension of time for Mr. and
32 Mrs. Sperry. Additionally, Bergstrom stated that the City has a commitment to provide a 100-
year flood protection for every resident in the City.
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
June 20, 2000
Page 3
•
1 Motion by Stille, second by Thomas, to approve a 15-foot lot variance and a 1,015 lot coverage
2 variance due to the following reasons: (1) the property cannot be put to reasonable use with the
3 current zoning; (2) the lot is unique in nature (3) the landowner did not cause the uniqueness; and
4 (4) the variance will be in the spirit of the Zoning Code and will not alter the surrounding
5 environment.
6 Motion carried unanimously.
7 Bergstrom reminded the Sperrys that this issue would before the City Council on June 27, 2000.
8 He would encourage Mr. and Mrs. Sperry to attend the meeting to answer questions.
9 2. Public Hearing: AT&T Wireless for 2801 37th Avenue NE.
10 Chair Bergstrom opened the Public Hearing at 7:20 p.m.
11 Chair Bergstrom requested a report from Staff. Assistant City Manager Isom stated that AT&T
12 Wireless Services was applying for a Conditional Use Permit to allow for a new 75-foot cellular
13 monopole to be placed on an industrial zoned property at 2801 37th Avenue NE. AT&T has
14 obtained permission from the owner of the property, who was present at the meeting. This would
15 be the second such monopole on this property, with the first being owned by US West Wireless
�16 Services.
�I7 Bergstrom invited Julie Townsend, AT&T Wireless, to address the Commission. Ms. Townsend
18 stated that she was present to request a conditional use permit on behalf of AT&T Wireless
19 Services, to allow for a 75 foot monopole at the property located at 2801 37th Avenue NE. She
20 stated she had brought pictures as requested at the Concept Review in May, and in that respect,
21 she showed the photographs for the Commissioners to review.
22 Ms. Townsend stated that the proposed equipment building is expected to be 12" x 28" and
23 would be made of a material that will match the building and can be painted the same color. The
24 monopole would be standing next to the equipment shelter. The shelter and monopole can be
25 situated to meet any setback requirements to the real property line. The assumed property line is
26 along a fence, so a variance was not needed.
27 Thomas inquired if there had been any further discussion about building a tower that was 100
28 foot tall, or the possibility of building a pole of 75 feet, with the capacity to add on an additional
29 25 feet. This would be in the case that any other wireless services wished to place a monopole in
30 the area.
31 Melsha inquired if any further discussions had been achieved with US West about co-locating the
32 monopole. Ms. Townsend said discussions did continue, but a standstill was reached.
Chair Bergstrom called for any input from the audience, and hearing none, closed the Public
Hearing at 7:30 p.m.
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
June 20, 2000
Page 4
1 Bergstrom commented that he felt it was a positive step that AT&T Wireless was willing to
2 construct a larger pole than it needed in the case that the pole needed to be added onto at a future
3 date.
4 Stille mentioned that at the last meeting, Commissioner Melsha had expressed an opinion that
5 the two organizations (US West and AT&T Wireless) should be able to work together in regard
6 to the placement of the monopole. Bergstrom acknowledged that this was a good possibility;
7 however, due to the fact that there was a specific request before the Commission from AT&T,
8 the Commission�needed to move forward on this issue.
9 Isom stated that he was not aware of any requirements in the Conditional Use Permit that
10 incorporated rules in relation to companies working together.
11 Melsha said that placing any conditions with respect to working with US West regarding the
12 placement of the AT&T pole was not an option as this point, but placing certain conditions could
13 be considered for future requests. An example would be a condition of the CUP could be for the
14 parties to submit the request to arbitration if an agreement could not be reached.
15 Motion by Hanson, second by Thomas, to approve the Conditional Use Permit for AT&T
16 Wireless Services to build a new 75-foot monopole based on the following conditions: (1)the
monopole must be constructed that an additional 25-foot segment could be added in the future to
allow for another communications company to use the pole; and(2)the coloration of the pole
19 and accompanying equipment shelter must match the existing structure as closely as possible.
20 Motion carried unanimously.
21 Bergstrom reminded Ms. Townsend that this issue would be before the City Council at the
22 meeting on June 27, 2000, and he encouraged her to be at the meeting to answer any questions.
23 3. Public Hearing: An Ordinance amendment relating to Lot Coverage and Building to Land
24 Ration.
25 Chair Bergstrom opened the Public Hearing at 7:35 p.m.
26 Chair Bergstrom asked for a report from Staff. Assistant City Manager Isom stated that this item
27 originated with the Planning Commission, and was brought before the City Council on May 9,
28 2000. At that point, Mayor Cavanaugh directed Staff to return the issue to the Planning
29 Commission for official approval. If approval to the Ordinance is given by the Planning
30 Commission, the issue will return to the City Council on June 27, 2000.
31 Isom requested that Commissioner Tillmann provide a brief summary. Tillmann stated that the
32 lot coverage ordinance was proposed to change in two ways: (1) decks would not be included as
3 part of the lot coverage ratio if the surface of the deck and the area below the deck was a pervious
surface; and(2)to create a two-tier lot coverage limit. In this respect, lots over 9,000 square feet
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
June 20, 2000
Page 5
1 would retain the current 35% lot coverage ratio, and the lot coverage ratio would increase to 40%
2 for lots at or under 9,000 square feet.
3 Tillmann continued by stating that an area would be added to the application for a building
4 permit that would require the applicant to specify a stormwater management plan for the project.
5 This specification needs to only be a short paragraph. Additionally, the applicant would be
6 provided with stormwater education materials.
7 Bergstrom called for input from the audience, and hearing none, closed the Public Hearing at
8 7:39 p.m.
9 Motion by Stille, second by Melsha, to approve Ordinance 2000-003, an Ordinance Relating to
10 Lot Coverage and Building to Land Ratio, amending Sections 1605 Subd. 44(a) and 1615.05,
11 Subd. 8 of the 1993 St. Anthony Code of Ordinances.
12 Motion carried unanimously.
13 4. Public Hearing: Hillcrest Development's Preliminary Development Plan.
14 Chair Bergstrom opened the Public Hearing at 7:40 p.m.
15
Chair Bergstrom requested a report from Staff. Assistant City Manager Isom stated that Staff has
7 been working with Dahlgren, Shardlow, and Uban (Consulting Planners) regarding the Hillcrest
18 Development renovation of Apache Plaza. As explained in a memorandum in the Commission's
19 packets, Hillcrest Development has made an application for a Rezoning and Planned Unit
20 Development for Apache Plaza and certain surrounding properties to allow for the
21 redevelopment of the site as a commercial mixed use development. Specifically, the applicant
22 proposes to redevelop the former Apache Plaza Shopping Center building for use by a mix of
23 tenants to include high technology office, general office, warehouse, light industrial and some
24 accessory retail uses, along with a future community space.
25 Bergstrom invited Anthony Gleekel, counsel for Hillcrest Development, to address the
26 Commission. Mr. Gleekel stated that the application has been resubmitted, but was the same in
27 many ways. For example,the exhibits are the same, but some of the narrative of the application
28 had changed. Mr. Gleekel stated that Hillcrest planned on meeting or exceeding the code
29 requirements raised, and a more specific landscape plan and detailed sizes, types of plantings and
30 then a phasing schedule that is being discussed will be more finalized in the future.
31 In regard to signage, Mr. Gleekel stated that Hillcrest has not finalized a signage'plan, but will
32 coordinate the plan with existing ordinances.
33 Mr. Gleekel stated that the stormwater drainage issue is an on-going discussion, but that Hillcrest
has the same commitment to resolve this issue in the most satisfactory manner possible. He
reiterated Hillcrest Development's commitment to meet and/or exceed the existing code
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
June 20, 2000
Page 6
•
1 requirements. The timing, however, would need to be negotiated to construct the stormwater
2 improvement.
3 Bergstrom asked Mr. Gleekel to highlight the specific changes with regard to the application.
4 Mr. Gleekel said there has not been any substantive changes, except the traffic analysis,which
5 was included with the Commission packet. Mr. Gleekel stated that he would assure the
6 Commission that the document in question had addressed the issue of the New Market site as
7 was discussed at a prior meeting.
8 Bergstrom thanked Mr. Gleekel for his input and presentation.
9 Bergstrom invited Ms. Ellen Berkelhamer, Senior Planner, Dahlgren, Shardlow, and Uban, Inc.
10 to address the Commission.
11 Ms. Berkelhamer began by reviewing that the proposed uses for the-site are a land-use
12 designation for mixed uses. In other words, all of the uses designated for that category would
13 apply and could be permitted. Hillcrest has submitted a list of uses that they would like to
14 develop a tenant base with, which was predominately general office tenants, and this is the
15 avenue Hillcrest would pursue. However, she stated that Hillcrest would like the opportunity to
build the space with other low-impact commercial uses in the case that general office is not
obtained.
18 She directed the Commission's attention to her memorandum of June 12, 2000, wherein the
19 recommendations of DSU were set forth on page 5, numbers 1 through 12.
20
21 Ms. Berkelhamer stated that stormwater is a significant issue and that Hillcrest is going beyond
22 what is required in terms of the,site. Additionally, Hillcrest is working with an engineer and the
23 Watershed District.
24 Stille inquired about Ms. Berkelhamer's earlier comment that DSU would recommend removal of
25 the pylon sign. Ms. Berkelhamer stated that it was simply DSU's recommendation for a
26 monument sign as opposed to a pylon sign, as an aesthetic preference. However, Hillcrest had
27 not submitted a signage plan to date.
28 After calling for any comments from the audience with relation to this issue and hearing none,
. 29 Chair Bergstrom closed the Public Hearing at 8:05 p.m.
30 Hatch had a concern about some of the permitted uses as it related to noise issues and traffic
31 patterns. Bergstrom said some of those concerns would be covered under the Performance
32 Standards, and a traffic report would shed some light on the traffic patterns.
Motion by Thomas, second by Hanson,to approve the application for rezoning from C-1 to
Planned Unit Development(PUD) and for approval of the Preliminary PUD Plans, subject to
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
June 20, 2000
Page 7
•
1 Condition Nos. 1-12 as contained in the DSU memorandum of June 12, 2000 and incorporated
2 herein by reference, as well as the information contained in the revised application package.
3 Motion carried unanimously.
4 Chair Bergstrom noted that this issue would be before the City Council at the meeting on
5 Tuesday, June 27, 2000 and he encouraged Hillcrest Development and related parties to attend
6 the meeting to answer questions and provide any information necessary.
7 5. Public Hearing: Tax Increment Financing Plan for Apache Plaza.
8 Chair Bergstrom opened the Public Hearing at 8:20 p.m.
9
10 Chair Bergstrom invited Mr. Steinman, Springsted, Public Finance Advisors, to address the
11 Commission. Mr. Steinman distributed an updated memorandum from what was presented in the
12 Commission's agenda packets.
13 Mr. Steinman continued by reviewing the memorandum in detail with the Commission, and the
14 Tax Increment Financing (TIF)plan for the property/site known as the Apache Plaza..
15 Thomas inquired of Mr. Steinman if any thought had been given to expanding the District over to
0 Stinson. Mr. Steinman stated that he was not aware of any discussions to that effect.
17 Bergstrom inquired of Mr. Steinman if this project would affect the bond rating of the City; and
18 additionally he inquired about the worst case scenario financially for the City if the project goes
19 through as proposed.
20 Mr. Steinman stated that, as the concept is proposed, it does not include bonding for any portion
21 of the project. Bonding would be a limited possibility. Mr. Steinman stated that as far as a
22 financial risk to the City on this project,the risk was very low to the City.
23 Charles F. Habiger, representing the owners at 3813 Stinson Boulevard, approached the
24 Commission. One of the issues that his clients would like to address is that they would not be
25 opposed to having the TIF District extended to include their site, but that there are historic
26 drainage patterns that affect their site.
27 Bergstrom directed Staff to work with Mr. Habiger on obtaining additional information with
28 regard to the issue.
29 After calling for additional input from the audience and hearing none, Chair Bergstrom closed
30 the Public Hearing at 8:37 p.m.
Motion by Melsha, second by Bergstrom, to approve the Tax Increment Financing (TIF) concept
as presented to the Planning Commission by Springsted, Public Financial Advisors.
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
June 20, 2000
Page 8
•
1 Motion carried unanimously.
2 VI. POSTPONED APPLICATIONS.
3 None.
4 Chair Bergstrom called for a recess at 8:35 p.m.
5 VII. REPORTS,PRESENTATIONS AND/OR CONCEPT REVIEWS.
6 Chair Bergstrom called the meeting to order at 8:45 p.m.
7 1. Concept Review: 2801 37th Avenue NE.
8 Chair Bergstrom asked for a report from Staff. Assistant City Manager Isom reported that Mr. Ken
9 Solie, Owner of Village Properties, seeks to (1) Subdivide the land associated with Lot 2,Block 1,
10 Apache Plaza 3rd Addition; (2) Subdivide the land associated with Lot 1, Block 1, apache Terrace
11 Addition; and (3) Combine the original parcels remaining after the subdivisions into one lot. All
12 land in question is presently zoned LI. The existing industrial building will be on the combined lot.
13 Mr. Solie's intent is to sell the two outer lots.
14 Isom continued by stating that City Attorney Soth had been contacted to review this issue,and that
15 Mr. Soth had recommended a Declaration of Restrictions Agreement. Such an agreement would
state,in essence,that the City would approve of the combining of the lots and that the Owner would
7 take that information to the County.
18 Isom introduced Mr. Ken Solie, owner of Village Properties, and invited him to approach the
19 Commission. Mr. Solie stated that he is proposing to subdivide and recombine the land associated
20 with the Industrial Custom Products building at 2801 37th Avenue NE. Mr. Solie stated that with
21 reference to the proposed subdivisions, he is currently leasing a strip of land to the north of the
22 existing building from the CP Railroad to provide convenience parking for tenant employees. This
23 lease has been in place since at least 1979 and discussions with the railroad indicate that it is not
24 likely that the lease would ever be terminated. If it were terminated, however, he would have a
25 difficult time providing on site parking according to the Ordinance.
26 Consequently, Mr. Solie stated that at worst case, he would be forced to buy the land from the
27 railroad. Various discussion ensued regarding required parking spaces and City ordinance, and
28 options depending upon the outcome of discussions with the.railroad.
29 In response to a comment by Hatch regarding the Livable Communities Grant,Bergstrom explained
30 to the audience that the City has submitted a grant request to do a future land study for a large area,
31 but that the City is not targeting any particular parcel. Additionally the Metropolitan Council has
32 grant programs for doing long-term studies. Both of these properties are inside the area, but have
33 not been specifically targeted by the study.
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
June 20, 2000
Page 9
•
1 Bergstrom noted that Mr. Solie's next step was to coordinate with Assistant City Manager Isom to
2 move forward with the project. The issue would probably be on the Planning Commission's agenda
3 for next month.
4 Chair Bergstrom thanked Mr. Solie for the concept review and presentation.
5 2. Concept Review: 2501 37th Avenue NE.
6 Chair Bergstrom requested a report from Staff. Assistant City Manager Isom reported that the
7 applicant, Dr. Terry Rapacz, was seeking to expand his clinic by purchasing a proposed parcel of
8 land from Mr. Ken Solie, Owner of Village Properties.
9 In this respect, Mr. Art Brown, Prudential Real Estate, approached the Commission and presented
10 the detailed plans for the expansion of Apache Animal Hospital.
11 Jeff Agnes, architect,approached the Commission and reviewed in detail the plans presented. His
12 presentation depicted a 4,000 to 5,000 foot building, and stated that Dr. Rapacz was considering ,.
13 using.some residential features for the building in order to coordinate with the residential character
14 of the surrounding area. In that respect,Mr. Agnes presented an artist's rendering of the proposed
15 building, which incorporated certain residential features into the exterior.
Bergstrom acknowledged that he was in support that the design was of a residential nature, and he
7 is pleased that there would not be any significant grading in the area.
18 Isom noted that currently the Commission is simply looking at rezoning the property and to
19 combining the lots. Once discussions have been accomplished with the railroad, additional
20 information will be obtained and a return to the Commission would be in order.
21 Various discussion ensued about additions to existing buildings that have been grandfathered into
22 the existing Code.
23 Thomas inquired of Mr.Agnes if decorative lighting was planned for the building. Mr.Agnes stated
24 that lighting is part of the architecture planned and that Dr. Rapacz would enjoy working with the
25 City on attractive and decorative lighting to compliment what the City has planned for the area.
26 Thomas inquired if the City needed to be concerned about a building-to-lot ratio. Bergstrom
27 confirmed that required was only for residential property.
28 Bergstrom encouraged Dr. Terry Rapacz and his staff to work with Spencer Isom in implementing
29 the proposed project.
30 3. Concept Review: 3259 Stinson Boulevard.
Chair Bergstrom asked for a report from Staff.
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
June 20, 2000
Page 10
•
1 Assistant City Manager Spencer Isom reported that the applicant,Tony Farah,was seeking to expand
2 the building at 3259 Stinson Boulevard onto the adjacent lot at 3245 Stinson Boulevard. Therefore,
3 said expansion requires a petition for rezoning of 3245 Stinson Boulevard from R2 to C. In addition,
4 the lots should be combined via a "Declaration of Restrictions" agreement as drafted by the City
5 Attorney. Staff has attempted to contact the owner regarding the content of the submittal, but was
6 not successful. In addition, the applicant, Tony Farah, was not in attendance at the Commission
7 meeting.
8 Bergstrom noted that this issue would be tabled.
9 4. Concept Review: 2654 Kenzie Terrace.
10 Chair Bergstrom requested a report from Staff.
11 Assistant City Manager Spencer Isom noted that James Abbott, Associate Pastor, had submitted a
12 June 12 communication (in Commission agenda packets) for locating the Frontline Church and
13 Outreach Center in the commercial property at 2654 Kenzie Terrace. The relocation would require
14 a petition for amendment of the zoning ordinance (adding a church as a conditional use in a C
15 district) and permit for conditional use. The Church does not own the property; therefore, they
16 cannot serve without the written permission from the owners, as the applicant.
0 Bill Arrigoni, Senior Pastor of Frontline Church, was introduced and invited to approach the
18 Commission.
19 Mr.Arrigoni stated that the Church had secured a purchase agreement of the property. Mr.Arrigoni
20 presented a sketch of the current building and surrounding area. Additionally, various information
21 regarding the Church was distributed to the Commissioners for review. The Church is currently
22 located in Roseville. Mr. Arrigoni stated that there would be extensive landscaping to the existing
23 building, as well as a significant amount of renovation. There would not be any curb cuts, as there
24 are some currently on the property. On the southwest corner,brickwork would be instituted to give
25 the building a pleasing appearance. A street-side sign would be located by the entrance from Kenzie
26 Terrace. The northeast corner of the building would also be used for an entrance, but would be
27 considered the back of the building and additional landscaping would be implemented to spruce up
28 the property.
29 In response to Mr. Stille's question regarding parking, Mr. Arrigoni stated that the Church's total
30 membership, including children, would be at approximately 150. Additionally, the interior of the
31 building would seat approximately 240, so adequate parking was currently in place. If additional
32 parking was needed in the future, the Church would investigate other sources.
33 Stille inquired about funding for the renovation,and Mr.Arrigoni responded that they have a funding
34 source in place through the Church's bank. The monies are in place and the renovation could begin
35 soon.
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
June 20, 2000
Page 11
•
1 Mr.Arrigoni said the target date for closing is November 1 and he would consider a minimum of 90
2 days for renovations. The earliest occupation date for the building, depending upon certain
3 circumstances, would be February, 2001.
4 Thomas inquired if the proposed street sign would be in the right of way. Mr. Arrigoni said the
5 Church is working with a sign person and the Church would stay within the required Codes in
6 relation to the sign. Mr.Arrigoni stated he is aware that the Codes are for the safety of the residents
7 and the Church has every intention of following the Codes to the greatest extent.
8 Hanson inquired if Mr. Arrigoni had a concern about the front door of the Church being in close
9 proximity to the street. Mr. Arrigoni stated that he believed the front door is 30-35 feet from the
10 street,but a possibility would be to close the door off with some landscaping. Mr. Arrigoni stated
11 the issue had not been considered by the Church at this point, but in response to the concern, the
12 Church would be interested in hearing suggestions.
13 Mrs. Lisa Arrigoni pointed out that there was a ramp along the front of the building complete with
14 landscaping that could help to alleviate the concern about the close proximately to the street.
15 Bergstrom noted that City ordinances do not include Churches in commercial districts because the
16 City has felt that Churches and commercial districts do not support each other. The City is looking
to provide land use that is both compatible and supportive of the other uses. Bergstrom stated that
8 both entities stand independent, and that since the property is zoned commercial,the City searches
19 for businesses that support commercial.
20 Bergstrom stated that most- or all - of the City's churches are located in the residential area of the
21 City, as opposed to the commercial. Bergstrom cautioned Mr. Arrigoni that the request might be
22 difficult to achieve.
23 Mr. Arrigoni stated that the building is free standing, so it would be possible for the zoning to be
24 reconsidered,particularly in light of the fact that the residential area of Autumn Woods is nearby.
25 Mr. Arrigoni stated that he is encouraged to bring an updated building and to maintain a presence
26 in the City. Mr. Arrigoni stated that he felt that the Church would bring positive visions to the City
27 and he would appreciate it if the Commission would provide the Church a serious consideration to
28 amending the zoning for this particular area.
29 Tillmann said her first reaction was concern about how the property would fit in with the community
30 green space with the St. Anthony Shopping Center and Village Green space. She would be
31 interested in Mr. Arrigoni's ideas with regard to how the Church would compliment that space.
32 Mr. Arrigoni stated that the Church is interested in working with the City and would like to review
the plans in order to blend and compliment the City's vision.
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
June 20, 2000
Page 12
•
1 Bergstrom stated that Mr. Arrigoni could obtain a copy of the concept plan of the St. Anthony
2 Shopping Center from Assistant City Manager Isom.
3 Hanson wished to direct Staff to work with the City's Consultant(Dick Krier)regarding obtaining
4 some ideas from regarding incorporating the Church into the vision of the St. Anthony Shopping
5 Center. Additionally, since the Church is non profit, that building would not generate the
6 commercial tax income that a commercial building would generate. The City has made a
7 commitment to keeping the St.Anthony Shopping Center a commercial entity,and he believed that
8 issue should be reviewed.
9 Thomas echoed Hanson's comments, but stated he was torn because the Church would be located
10 in a commercial as well as a residential area. Thomas would like to review the issue further in detail.
11 Melsha shared Hanson's concerns, yet stated that there is the possibility of increasing the usage of
12 St. Anthony Shopping Center and the green space by having-the Church in close proximity.
13 Hatch mentioned that the architect could be asked to modify the entrances so as to alleviate the flow
14 of traffic.
15A gentleman from Krause Anderson, the landlord for the Hamline Shopping Center where the
Church is currently located, wished to acknowledge the Church's excellent record as a tenant. He
7 stated that the Church has done an excellent job in renovating the space and the area the Church
18 occupies is quite impressive. The other tenants in the building are impressed with the Church as a
19 tenant, and the landlord stated the Church would be an excellent addition to the City.
20 Stille echoed Melsha's comments regarding the synergy the Church could bring to the St. Anthony
21 Shopping Center:
22 Mr.Arrigoni continued his presentation by explaining the programs the Church offers to its members
23 and various outreach programs in which the Church has become involved.
24 Isom wished to clarify for the Commission that this is not a site-specific request because the
25 Planning Commission would be allowing churches citywide throughout the district,and then the City
26 would then issue a conditional use permit within the zone.
27 Basically, Isom stated that the Commission would be deciding if the City wished to add churches
28 as a permitted use under a commercial district,because currently churches are a permitted use under
29 a residential use.
30 Isom noted that he had spoken with City Attorney William Soth and it was determined that the only
31 way this project could proceed would be for the City to modify the conditional use permit
12 requirements of the City's zoning code.
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
June 20, 2000
Page 13
•
1 Isom clarified that the owner of the property needed to forward a letter to Staff stating that the
2 Church can act on behalf of the owner. After that process, an application must be submitted for
3 rezoning.and would require three readings before the City Council. Due to the nature of the matter,
4 Isom noted it would not be likely that City Manager would waive the first two readings.
5 Bergstrom acknowledged that the next step would be to work with the property owner and put
6 together an application for rezoning. Isom stated that he would provide the application and it would
7 be up to Mr. Arrigoni to decide how to present the issue.
8 Chair Bergstrom thanked Mr.Arrigoni and the members of the Church for attending the meeting and
9 providing input.
10 5. Concept Review: 3813 Stinson Boulevard NE.
11 Chair Bergstrom requested a report from Staff.
12 Assistant City Manager Isom explained the issue of building a Fuel Mart Car Wash on the property
13 at 3813 Stinson Boulevard,NE and is zoned C. This would require a permit for conditional use.
14 Since the owners own the adjacent commercial property(Fuel Mart),if the Commission wishes,they
15 would be willing to combine the two lots into one. If the lots are combined, then it would also
�16 require a Declaration of Restrictions.
'f7 Chair Bergstrom introduced Mr. Charles F. Habiger, HKS Associates, in attendance to represent
18 Hadi and Roger Abou-Mourad. Messrs. Abou-Mourad wished to build a cash wash and have
19 submitted an application to that extent.
20 Regarding watershed issues, Mr. Habiger stated that the site, under the RCWD,has to be 2'/z acres
21 and within 1,000 feet of a protected wetland, or the site is located in the flood plain. Additionally,
22 the site is not increasing the amount of impervious surfaces.
23 Mr. Habiger stated that, if approval is received, construction would start almost immediately.
24 Regarding consolidation of the two parcels of property, it is his understanding that there are two
25 separate mortgages by two different lending institutions, and at some point, there could be one
26 financing package that would cover both parcels. Consolidation could be accomplished if the City
27 Council and Planning Commission so desire.
28 Tillmann inquired if there was enough business in that area to support another car wash.
29 Mr. Habiger stated that the other facilities are somewhat different. One of the other facilities is a
30 full-service car wash, and the other is a self-service car wash, and what Messrs. Abou-Mourad are
31 proposing is a drive-through car wash.
Thomas mentioned that the building proposed is not aesthetically pleasing and he was not sure that
the building was compatible with what is proposed for the area. He personally felt that a restaurant
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
June 20, 2000
Page 14
1 of sorts would be more desirable and was unsure of the neighborhood's reaction to another car wash
2 in the area.
3 Stille inquired if the existing structure (the fuel building) would be renovated. Mr. Abou-Mourad
4 stated that at this time, simply the car wash was being reviewed, and possibly in the future, a .
5 renovation would be considered.
6 Hatch suggested that the Commission receive additional detail on proposed landscaping.if this issue
7 were to come before the Commission again.
8 Mr. Habiger announced that the car wash would have a pylon sign. Bergstrom requested that Mr.
9 Habiger work with Assistant City Manager Isom regarding the City's requirements for signage. Isom
10 noted that the City allows a gas station one pylon sign.
11 Various discussion ensued regarding the combination of the two lots and the advantages and/or
12 disadvantages to the City of such combination.
13 Bergstrom noted that some of the developers in the area have met with the Silver Lake Homeowners
14 Association and discussed any proposed projects. Although Bergstrom stated that the suggestion
15 could not be given as a requirement,it would be an excellent suggestion that Messrs.Abou-Mourad
and Mr. Habiger meet with the Association to obtain input and provide information.
17 In response to an inquiry if the facade of the building could be improved to be more aesthetically
18 pleasing, Mr. Habiger stated that the architect would be involved and improvements would be
19 considered.
20 Jerry Kuske, who was in the audience, stated that he represented Don's Car Wash. He stated that
21 the hours of operation have been developed to match lifestyles and needs of the surrounding
22 residents. This is due to the fact,he stated,that certain warning bells or sounds must be used in order
23 to alert people to the starting of machines.
24 Bergstrom stated that he would like for the applicant to specifically address that issue in the
25 application, and that certain conditions and requirements could be implemented in the conditional
26 use permit to that effect.
27 Chair Bergstrom thanked Mr. Habiger and Messrs. Abou-Mourad.
28 VIII. CONTINUED BUSINESS.
29 1. Update on RCWD's permit No. 9611.
30 The update was provided for the Commission's information and Assistant City Manager Isom did
31 not have any further comments.
2. Livable Communities Demonstration Grant Application and Resolution No. 00-051.
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
June 20, 2000
Page 15
•
1 Assistant City Manager Isom distributed a handout regarding this issue for the Commission's review.
2 3. Sample of a Planned Unit Development Agreement.
3 A sample of a potential.Planned Unit Development Agreement was distributed to the Commissioners
4 for review.
5 IX. COMMISSIONER INPUT.
6 Bergstrom announced he will be the Planning Commission representative to the June 27,2000 City
7 Council meeting.
8 1. Commissioner Comments.
9 Stille did not have any comments.
10 Hatch commented that he had obtained a copy of an ordinance from a nearby city with regard to the
11 placing of cellular antennas and the requirement that companies work together. Hatch suggested a
12 possible action for the future that the Commission could take to implement an ordinance requiring
13 companies to work together.
14 Hatch continued by stating that he had become aware of a planning grant application and that might
be related to some recent issues. Bergstrom requested that Hatch receive some of the particulars of
6 the application and subsequently requested that Assistant City Manager Isom place the information
17 into the Commission's meeting packages for next month.
18 Bergstrom commented that recently he attended a League of Minnesota Cities meeting,and become
19 aware of a company that assists cities in siting communications towers. The company would
20 inventory all of the City's property,and then make an evaluation of its applicability for the siting of
21 antennas.
22 Additionally,the company would assist the City in rewriting ordinances. Then,the company would
23 build the towers, charge rent to companies who use them, and then split the income with the City.
24 Bergstrom stated that possibly a moratorium should be recommended with regard to placement of
25 antenna towers until the Commission and City have had a chance to work out a plan.
26 Bergstrom requested that Hatch provide a copy of the proposed ordinance he had obtained to
27 Assistant City Manager Isom for distribution to the other Commissioners.
28 Isom stated he would research the issue of towers and antennas, and investigate what other cities
29 have done.
30 Melsha did not have a comment,except to say that he agrees with the concept to review a proposed
ordinance for handling communication issues.,
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
June 20, 2000
Page 16
•
1 Thomas agreed that a recommendation could be made to the City Council to have a 60- or 90-day
2 moratorium on the issue.
3 On another issue,Thomas commented about the issue of the Frontline Church relocation. Thomas
4 suggested that if the Commission decided to move ahead with the Church's request, that the
5 Commission should investigate if other communities have faced this issue and the outcome.
6 Additionally,Thomas mentioned that it would be beneficial if the Commission had specific design
7 standards that could be referred to when speaking with developers regarding potential new projects.
8 Hanson commented that he understood that the City has had discussions with the individuals
9 regarding the Frontline Church project. Additionally,Hanson would like an explanation as to why
10 the Commission had not heard about the plans for the water issue north of 37th Avenue.
11 Bergstrom directed Assistant City Manager Isom to obtain a report on such issue, and stated that
12 there is a study being done currently with regard to the stormwater issue. Additionally, Bergstrom
13 will discuss this issue with City Manager Michael Morrison.
14
15 Tillmann inquired if the City had considered purchasing the Custom Liquidators property. Isom
6 noted that he was not aware of any such discussions.
7 X. ADJOURNMENT.
18 Motion by Melsha, second by Hatch,to adjourn the meeting at 11:25 p.m.
19 Motion carried unanimously.
20 Respectfully.submitted,
21 Sue Selseth
22 TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
•