Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPL MINUTES 03151977 Meeting Sheet IIIIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIIIIIIIII 105654 Box: 35 Folder: PL MINUTES AND AGENDAS 1977 Document: PL MINUTES 03151977 CITY OF ST. ANTHONY PLANNING BOARD MINUTES March 15, 1977 The meeting was called to order at 7 :37 P.M. by Chairman Hiebel. Present at roll call: Marks, Letourneau, Hiebel, Rymarchick and Cowan Absent: Johnson, Bowerman Also Present: J. Fornell, Administrative Assistant Motion by Mr. Marks, seconded by Mr. Letourneau to approve the February minutes as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Cowan was designated to represent the Planning Board at the March 29th City Council meeting. The public hearing on the Richard and Phyllis Fudali request to re- zone Lots 17 and 18 , Block 12 , Mounds View Acres Second Addition from "L.I. " to "R-4" was opened at 7 :40 P.M. Mr. Hiebel explained the public hearing procedure and Mr. Fornell ex- plained the legal requirements of application and notification. No one present had failed to receive a notice of the hearing. Mr. Fudali then spoke at length on his request. He stated he would seek no variances and he would build and own the building for probably five years. He cited the attractiveness of Lakehill Apartments, which he intends to build something comparable to that building and comple- mentary to the holding pond known locally as Mirror Lake. The type of construction he is considering is Class I concrete, however, he said his plans may change in that regard due to the economics of con- struction. The approximately 30 unit building would be oriented to the pond, contain approximately 50% one bedroom units , and 50% two bedroom units . The units are proposed to have separate heating and air conditioning units. Mr. Fudali felt that the present "L.I. " zoning was not the highest and best use of the land and that the $500 ,000.00 - $750,000 .00 building would generate more taxes than many potential light industrial users of the land. He cited his good track record of building in St. Anthony and other local communities, including his current "Meadow Run" development in Fridley. • Mr. Rymarchick asked Mr. Fudali how many buildings he is considering. Mr. Fudali replied one building. Mr. Bernie Blanske, 4029 Silver Lake Road, stated that he recently bought the property at 3829 Foss Raod which presently has a single family home on it but is zoned for light industrial uses. His primary concern is that the zoning on his recently purchased property does not change. He was neither in favor of or opposed to the Fudali re- quest, in and of itself. He also cited a clean up problem on his property when Mirror Lake Manor was constructed. Mr. Jeff Olson, 3821 Foss Road, also was concerned about retaining the present light industrial zoning of his property. He did not care that much about whether the adjacent property is rezoned to permit apart- ments. He didn 't think the asthetic appeal of the pond was that great and said he did not see many people walking around the pond. Mr. Olson also said he was aware of Mr. Blanske 's clean up problem when Mirror Lake Manor was built and hoped it wouldn't happen on the pro- posed site. Mr. Henkel, owner of the lot zoned light industrial at approximately 3851 Chandler Drive also was concerned that this rezoning would not adversely input upon the zoning of his lot. • The Board then commenced a discussion on the merits of the proposal . Mr. Rymarchick said he took a look at the area and feels that R-4 would be more compatible with the pond and the area and therefore felt the proposed zoning was reasonable. Mr. Letourneau expressed a concern about rezoning the property without a site plan. He wanted more specifics before he would feel comfortable approving the request. Mr. Hiebel stated that the zoning ordinance provides many controls over apartment development and the Board and Council would want to see a site plan before a building permit is issued. Mr. Marks reitterated the minority recommendation of the Planning Board on the zoning of this land when the zoning ordinance was recommended to the Council : that R-1 could prove to be an attractive, good use of land. He felt that any residential use of the land would possibly help the school district' s declining enrollment problem. He also agreed with Mr. Letourneau that it would be desirable to see a specific site plan for the proposal. Mr. Cowan then moved that the rezoning of lots 17 and 18 , Block 12 , Mounds View Acres Second Addition to "R-4" be recommended to the City Council for the following reasons : • (2) • 1. The proposed use is more compatible to the residential uses in the area. 2. The City can use the additional dwellings . There is a possibility that the school district will gain a few new students. 3. At one point in time, the land was to be zoned for apartments. Mr. Rymarchick then offered a fourth condition, which was accepted by Mr. Cowan: 4 . That there be no change in the zoning of the parcels presently zoned light industrial that were the concern of Mr. Olson, Mr. Blanske and Mr. Henkel. Before the motion was seconded, Mr. Marks again suggested that the re- zoning be contingent upon a review of a site plan and building plans . Mr. Hiebel felt that the use was adequately controlled by the zoning ordinance. Mr. Letourneau expressed general support for rezoning to R-4 but also wanted to see a formal site plan. • Mr. Cowan felt that the use (apartments) is specific, not like rezoning a parcel to commercial and not knowing what the actual commercial use would be. Mr. Fudali stated he could not accept rezoning contingent upon an ac- ceptable site plan. He must know whether or not he can proceed and felt that adequate controls exist under existing building codes, mort- gager' s requirements, a final site plan review and the City zoning ordinance. Mr. Olson expressed his displeasure with the metal building across from his property and hoped that the development, if approved, would be a good one. Mr. Fornell mentioned the controls that exist under the newly adopted zoning ordinance which controls density, apartment size, setbacks , height, parking and landscaping. Mr. Rymarchick then seconded Mr. Cowan' s motion to approve the rezoning. Motion to recommend rezoning of Lots 17 and 18, Block 12, Mounds View Acres Second Addition to R-4 to the City Council carried unanimously. - The Board adjourned for ten minutes and then resumed the agenda with Mr. Chuck Bartlett's request for concept approval of a self service • (3) • car wash on the south 150 feet of Lot 1, Block 1, Apache Plaza Second Addition (approximately 245 ' 39th Avenue N.E. ) . The land is currently zoned commercial. Mr. Bartlett explained that his company has had a very good experience in developing these types of car washes, based largely upon a quality approach and good housekeeping practices . He said this is a most desireable market and that he had several people who are interested in purchasing the wash. Mr. Bartlett said the proposed wash would be of brick and block con- struction, have a heated floor to prevent ice build-up in winter, an attendant would be on duty during busy hours, and the project would conform to all applicable codes and ordinances. The site plan pre- sented was in substantial conformance with the zoning ordinance. Board members raised questions about the roof design, ownership ar- rangements, location decision, possible litter problems and conversion of the building to other uses should the wash prove to be not economi- cally viable. Mr. Bartlett said the design would be of attractive brick and block construction, would be owned by a couple living in New Brighton, felt the potential market was very good and that according to mortgagers , the building could; be reconverted to other uses. He also said there • is a possibility that a water recycling system may be installed, al- though there are problems with salt in the water during winter months and that his company has been studying the feasibility of using solar energy panels to heat the water. The roof construction would support the additional weight of such a system. The Board discussed the economic feasibility of such a project and the concensus was that the City is not in a position to make economic de- terminations of this type from both practical and legal perspectives. Motion by Mr. Rymarchick seconded by Mr. Hiebel to recommend concept approval of a self service car wash at the site in question to the City Council subject to a review of the landscaping, building arrange- ments, and conformance with all applicable codes and ordinances and because of the proposal's compatibility to other uses in the area. The Board will also consider requiring a performance bond for landscap- ing, based upon the final landscaping plan. Mr. Marks and Mr. Letourneau expressed some concern about the economic viability of the proposal and its possible conversion to other uses . Mr. Bartlett felt that the future owners might want to expand, if any- thing. Mr. Cowan felt the Board should not be concerned with economic viability • that is up to the businessman and mortgage backers . (4) Mr. Marks felt it was only reasonable that the City make those con- siderations and he thought the City can legally do so. Mr. Letourneau felt it only proper that a developer at least justify the potential viability of a proposal and provide the information to the Board. Voting on the motion: Aye: Cowan, Rymarchick, Hiebel and Letourneau Nay: Marks Motion carried. , -The Board then discussed a possible P.U.D. proposal for the Hedlund property with Mr. Hedlund, Mr. Dale, Mr. Hedlund' s planner and Mr. Daubney, Mr. Hedlund 's attorney. Mr. Dale discussed elements of the plan at length specifying the numbers controls and regulations contained in a P.U.D. contract. The Board members made several comments concerning various possible uses, a sidewalk through the site, and the desireability of a compre- hensive plan for the entire block. • Mr. Daubney said that the two land owners to the north were not inter- ested in becoming involved in a P.U.D. The Board agreed that comments on the P.U.D. proposal should be pro- vided, preferably in writing, by April 1st to Mr. Fornell. The Board discussed the land use planning seminar in New Brighton held March 9th, a seminar on Planning and Zoning by the state, attended by Mr. Marks and the notion of economic feasibility and if and how cities can determine such. Motion by Mr. Cowan, seconded by Mr. Marks to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 11: 10 P.M. Jim Fornell Acting Secretary • (5)