HomeMy WebLinkAboutPL MINUTES 09161975 Meeting Sheet
IIIIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII IIII IIII
106246
Box: 36
Folder: PL MINUTES AND AGENDAS 1975
Document: PL MINUTES 09161975
CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
r September 16,1975
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Pro Tem Marks at 7:35 P.M.
Present for roll call : Rymarchick, Hiebel , Marks, Cowan, Bowerman and Johnson
Absent: Letourneau
Also present: Jim Fornell , Adm. Asst.
Motion by Mr. Hiebel and seconded by Mr. Rymarchick to approve the minutes of the August
19th, 1975 Board meeting.
Motion carried.
-,,,"-'Mr. E Mrs. Wm. Tedlund, 3114' Rankin Road, appeared to request that a Public Hearing
be held on their request for a side yard variance to permit the construction of an
addition to their home.
Mr. Fornell explained that the depth of the existing side yard for side yards ad-
jacent to streets is used as the criteria for allowing new construction. New
construction is permitted along the existing setback line. The variance in this case
is for the balcony, which projects approximately 4 ft. into the 19 ft. side yard.
It was suggested that the Tedlunds should bring to the PUblic Hearing a more accurate
• drawing for their proposal than the survey they had which located the house incorrect-
ly on the site.
There was also a discussion of whether having the Council hold the Public Hearing might
allow a fall construction but it was ascertained only one week would be saved and
Mr. Cowan insisted holding public hearings was the responsibility of the Planning Board.
Motion by Mr. Hiebel and seconded by Mr. Cowan to hold a Public Hearing at the October
21 , 1975 meeting of the Planning Board on the Tedlund request for a side yard variance
to allow an addition to the residence at 3111 Rankin Road.
\otion carried unanimously.
�r\ Ray Sopcinski appeared to request a Public Hearing be held on his request to be
allowed to build a 24 x 26 ft. garage onto the existing garage which he plans to convert
to a family room. He explained he was proposing to add to the side yard rather than
the back yard of his property so that the park-like area there might not be destroyed
and because the flooding at the intersection of Edward Street and 31st Avenue N.E.
would force him to raise the elevation of the garage if it were built behind the house.
Mr. Fornell explained that a variance is required because the garage would project
approximately seven feet into the existing side yard, which is adjacent to a
street.
Mr. Bowerman questioned whether the aistance between the proposed structure and the
• patio area would meet the City ordinance requirements.
During the discussion it was also ascertained the lot to the south of the Sopcinski
residence was substandard and not likely to be built upon.
e
Motion by Mr. Cowan and seconded by Mr. Bowerman to hold a public hearing on the
request for a side yard variance to allow Mr. Ray Sopcinski to construct a garage
on his residence at 2524 St. Anthony Road.
Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Dick Ernest of the R.C.E. Corporation presented site plans for his request for re-
zoning the property between the American Monarch building and Standard Station on
37th Avenue N.E. to allow the construction of two buildings for which the Planning
Board had previously had withheld approval .
The new site plans had been modified to provide a safer traffic pattern than the plan
presented to the Council August 19th. Mr. Ernest said modifications included eliminat-
ing the driveway which separated the proposed service office building and the
Country Kitchen restaurant-office building, moving the office building further to the
east and providing an internal driveway behind which linked the driveways to the west
of the office building and east of the restaurant. This driveway system would be 25
feet wide to allow two way traffic and was modified so that restaurant customers
exiting to the east could avoid a direct exit onto the busy intersection of Silver Lake
Road and 37th Avenue. Mr. Ernst said the changes also precluded an exit onto Belden Drive.
Moving the two buildings closer to each other had allowed some of the parking spaces to
be moved from the front and east side of the restaurant to the west side of the office
building and would therefore enable the developer to place 35 feet of greenery along
the boulevard on 37th Avenue.
Mr. Ernest said the Country Kitchen owners had also agreed to providing reflective
glass on the 37th Avenue side of the restaurant to eliminate the objections of Mr.
Art Thompson to "having to look right into the dininroom when he looked out his front
windows".
When Mr. Ernest said his request involved only land usage and he felt the signage was the
responsibility of the restaurant owners Mr. Marks and Mr. Johnson pointed out the City's
experience with business requests for signage after the buildings had been constructed
because they claimed they lacked proper identification and suggested it •was to Mr.
Ernst's advantage to get the point settled first for fear the restaurant owners might
find later that their decision to lease the building was contingent upon their being
allowed to erect the interstate type of sign which is their trademark.
Other changes in the plans as indicated by Mr. Ernest were the concrete curb between the
restaurant and the service station and a change in the location of the storage trash
addition. Mr. Bowerman said the timetable for erecting the restaurant prior to the
office building, which he considered the most desireable portion of the proposal ,
bother, I him and Mr. Ernst said he anticipated starting the second building almost
immedi tf,ly after the foundation for the restaurant was in.
Mr. JOpppp said his opposition to the proposal was based on fear that the traffic
genera.tjpp from the restaurant would result in further congestion of the Silver Lake
Road rsection and would probably increase the traffic down Belden Drive. He said
he was also concerned about the annoyance the neighbors might experience from the
headlights of restaurant customers as well as cooking odors, the hours of operation
and problems with signage for the restaurant.
Mr. Hiebel said that in addition to these points he was concerned that rezoning this
tract to commercial would open the door to future commercial usage of other undeveloped
land in the area. He also did not like the restaurant building being constructed be-
fore the office building.
Mr. Marks and Mr. Rymarchick said they were agreement with the objections to the
proposal which had been voiced by the residents of the neighborhood and felt the
inherent activity of a restaurant made the proposal objectionable so near a residential
neighborhood.
Mr. Rymarchick also said he was not convinced that many of the potential restaurant
customers would not choose Belden Drive or Coolidge Street to reach the restaurant
in preference to fighting the traffic at the intersection of Silver Lake Road and
37th Avenue.
Mr. Fornell also suggested Mr. Ernest to contact Ramsey County to ascertain whether
they and any plans for channelization of the traffic down 37th Avenue which might
interfere with his plans.
Motion by Rymarchick and seconded by Mr. Bowerman to reconvene the Public Hearing on
the Ernest proposal at the October 23, 1975 Board meeting and to waive further payment
of fees since most of the expenses had been incurred and paid for with the first public
hearing.
Voting on the motion:
Aye: Rymarchick, Cowan, Marks, Hiebel and Cowan
Nay: Johnson
Motion carried.
Mr�-•Rymarchick and Mr. Bowerman, who had been delegated the investigation of a possible
violation of the Board's intent in the manner in which the sign had been erected in
front of the Herfurth Realty Company, recommended no further Board action because the
sign is now visually acceptable following the elevation of the grade of Silver Lake
Road in front of the property and the landscaping around the sign being done in an
acceptable manner.
Mr. Rymarchick said he did feel that in any future instance where a sign variance is
requested in an area where regrading is anticipated, the sign should be erected after
the grade is established.
Mr. Clarence W. Gould, 1295 Oakcrest, Roseville, appeared to present his request for
1 a building permit to erect a steel warehouse designed primarily for storage but
occasionally for repair of pipe organ parts on Lot 3, Block 1 , Henkel Addition. The
lot which is 75 feet wide and 135 feet long is owned by Mr. & Mrs. Harold Henkel
who appeared to support the request.
Mr. Gould presented a colored brochure from the Lester Company portraying a prototype
of the proposed building. The applicant said he was trying to find out whether a
steel building would be acceptable since the cost of a masonry building would be
prohibitive. He said his business would require a minimum of parking spaces since
there was no customer traffic anticipated and there would only occasionally be 2
or 3 cars at the site.
Mr. Johnson said he was personally acquainted with Mr. Gould's business which involved
Moeller organs but he advised Mr. Bould that the Board would find it difficult to
arrive at a decision without more specific data on his plans for parking, curb cuts
and landscaping. It was Mr. Johnson's feeling however that a precedent for granting
the request had been established with the Donatelle Machine Shop, the millwork shop
and Happy's close by and he said it was his belief that the proposal would provide
a reasonable usage of the land especially because of its low traffic generation.
4
Mr. Rymarchick did not feel the proposal was compatible with the residential nature
of the neighborhood and said the businesses mentioned by Mr. Johnson were at the other
end of the area. He did not feel this type of industry provided enough blend from
residential to light industrial . Mr. Hiebel felt it would be premature to give approval
to a proposal for which the Board had so little specific information regarding site
location, parking and landscaping plans.
Mr. Fornell explained the City's staff recommendation that the request not be granted
because of the Planning Board's recommendation in the new zoning ordinance that this
property be rezoned R-4 for multiple dwellings, an idea which had Council concurrence.
He said he felt the Mirror hhke apartments across Foss Road made it preferable that the
area in question be kept for high density residential development. It was his contention
that the replatting of the Henkel property had resulted in lots which were too small for
light industrial usage.
Mr. Cowan said he wondered if the Board could reject the proposal on these grounds since
the new zoning ordinance was not yet in force. He suggested Mr. Marks, who is to
represent the Board at the next Council meeting, should let the Council know the dilemna
the Board found itself in with this proposal and similar proposals which are made for
property on which the zoning may be changed under the new zoning ordinance.
Mr. & Mrs. Henkel said they were surprised to learn the zoning for the property was now
being considered for multiple dwelling since not long ago a past Council had rejected
their efforts to have the land zoned in that manner so that they might sell the property
for that purpose.
They also said they could no longer afford to live in their home on the property because
of the assessments which had resulted from the land being zoned light industrial and
• had sold the residence.
Mr. S Mrs. Henkel also wanted to correct the impression that the Board had been given
that the people who had bought their home were unaware of the zoning of the area around
the home. They also said the rumor that they had been offered a large sum of money
for the tract was not true, saying the $40,000 theyvere offered was not sufficient
payment for the house, the surrounding lots and the costs incurred in replatting the
land and paying the higher assessments.
Motion by Mr. Hiebel and seconded by Mr. Johnson to table action on Mr. Gould's request
to build a steel warehouse on the land described above until receipt of more detailed
site plans so the Board can determine how the building will fit on the land and what
plans there are for parking, curb cuts and landscaping.
Voting on the motion:
Aye: Hiebel , Johnson, Rymarchick and Bowerman
Nay: Cowan
Abstain: Marks.
Motion to table carried.
~ Mrs. Paul Iverson, whose home is across 37th from the property involved in the
Ernst proposal was in attendance and discussed several points of her conversation
with Mr. Ernst with the Board members.
• Motion by Mr. Cowan and seconded by Mr. Marks to adjourn the meeting at 9:40 P.M. for
a work session at which free standing, monumental type sign could be considered.
Motion carried.
Helen Crowe, Secretary