Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPL MINUTES 04191977 Meeting Sheet IIIIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIIIIIIIII 105656 BOX: 35 Folder: PL MINUTES AND AGENDAS 1977 Document: PL MINUTES 04191977 • CITY OF ST. ANTHONY PLANNING BOARD MINUTES April 19 , 1977 The meeting was called to order at 7 : 35 P.M. by Chairman Hiebel. Present for roll call: Cowan, Rymarchick, Hiebel, Bowerman, Letourneau and Johnson Absent: Marks Also present: Jim Fornell, Administrative Assistant Harry Lekson, Building Inspector/Assessor The following corrections were made to the minutes for the March 15 , 1977 Planning Board meeting. Page 2, paragraph 5: Should read "adversely impact" rather than "adversely input" . Page 3 , paragraph 4 : Strike the entire 4th condition offered by Mr. Rymarchick. • Motion by Mr. Cowan and seconded by Mr. Rymarchick to approve the March 15, 1977 Planning Board minutes as corrected. Motion carried unanimously. ,'The Public Hearing on the request from Roger Tousley that he be granted the variances necessary to allow a 30 foot expansion to the front and another in the rear which will extend his existing car wash at 3725 Stin- son Boulevard to the lot line was opened at 7 : 40 P.M. Mr. Fornell said all the legal requirements of application and notification had been met but said this did not include properties in Columbia Heights when questioned on the point by Mr. Cowan, as that is not required. Mr. Tousley discussed the eight reasons he felt justified the variances as he had submitted them with the application as well as the sketch which represented the changes he was proposing. He said he foresaw economic difficulty in the face of the possibility of the minimum wage rising to $3.00 and the increase in energy costs if he is not permitted to increase the size of his existing building to accomodate the labor and energy saving machinery he proposes to purchase. He said such equipment would make it possible for him to increase the number of cars he can service in an hour from 70 to 100 at the same time it will decrease the number of workers necessary to run the car wash. The rear addition he said will house the cashier and an auto accessory store which he anticipates • will subsidize this salary cost. The added space in the rear will also I allow vacumming the cars while they are standing still. Mr. Tousley added that he has received complaints from OSHA about the hazards to the wcrkers of performing this service on a moving vehicle. The front addition will provide more stacking space for vehicles while the final drying processes are completed. The applicant said he has been attempt- ing for two years to buy additional land to the rear from the Apache Corporation. He told Mr. Johnson that, without this space, vehicles will be unable to make the turn into the car wash. Mr. Fornell pointed out that there has been no consistent set back line established along Stinson, citing Poppin Fresh Pie Shop as an example. It has a five foot setback. No one else appeared to speak for or against the proposal and the Public Hearing was closed at 8:00 P.M. Both Mr. Johnson and Mr. Rymarchick were reluctant to allow the the con- struction, to the lot line but took into cons d'eratLan the improbability of the "former Arlan' s building" being expanded. Mr. Cowan said he felt this was a unique situation. There is a possibility the traffic problem might be improved with the addition. The owner feels he has to have the improvement to continue in business . Owners of the building to the rear have raised no objections to the expansion. Motion by Mr. Johnson and seconded by Mr. Cowan to recommend to the Council that the variances be granted which will allow Roger Tousley to • make the additions he proposes to his car wash at 3725 Stinson Boulevard. Motion carried unanimously. �Ano .her Public Hearing was called at 8 :15 P.M. to consider the request from Berger Transfer and Storage Company that they be granted a side yard variance which will allow them to extend the addition for which they received approval last month to within 2 .78 feet of the lot line to the east. William Dircks of Berger was present to discuss the five reasons for granting the variance which were attached to the application. The primary reason for the expansion was to provide enough space to accomo- date large storage containers for household goods. He said the builder's agreement to stay within the required set backs was not acceptable to the company. He pointed out that the Auto Trac building to 'the east is built on the lot line and that company now uses the 15 feet for parking the cars they service. No one else appeared to speak for or against the proposal and the public Hearing was closed at 8 :25 P.M. Mr. Rymarchick and Mr. Bowerman questioned the Building Inspector's and Fire Marshal's opinons, as presented in Mr. Fornell' s memorandum, that the proximity of the two buildings would present little problem in fire fighting, wondering how that applied to residential building permits . Mr. Fornell said residential setbacks are often more for aesthetic reasons and open space. (2) • Mr. Johnson said he did not feel the applicant had proved undue hardship should the variance not be granted and foresaw a "city block of concrete in this area before long" . Mr. Fornell felt that Auto Trac and the dairy store will have serious parking problems if Ramsey County acquires the proposed ten feet of right of way on the north side of 37th Avenue N.E. Motion by Mr. Cowan and seconded by Mr. Rymarchick to recommend to the Council that a side yard variance to the Zoning Ordinance be granted which will allow the Berger Transfer and Storage Company to erect the proposed addition to its existing building on 37th Avenue N.E. (Plat 50510, parcel 04008) up to 2 .78 feet of the east lot line with the stipulation that an opaque fence be erected between the addition and the Auto Trac building to the east which will eliminate access and obscure litter and that the exterior architectural design and landscaping be provided in the manner agreed upon when the original addition was ap- proved. Voting on motion: Aye: Cowan, Rymarchick, Hiebel, Bowerman and Letourneau Nay: Johnson • Motion carried. 'The Board was reluctant to use the Community Development Block Grant funds available to involve a planner in the study of upgrading the com- mercial area in the southern portion of the City until some specific objectives had been set for what the Board hopes to accomplish in any study by an outside planner. Motion by Mr. Cowan and seconded by Mr. Rymarchick to refer the question of a commercial areas redevelopment analysis and planning study to the subcommittee appointed by the Board and already working on such a study of the economic viability and aesthetic improvement of the St. Anthony Shopping Center and Kenzie Terrace with the request that they establish the objectives to be sought in such a study. otion carried unanimously. The meeting was recess at 8 : 56 and reconvened at 9 :05 to consider the application for a Public Hearing on a PUD for the property owned by Gordon Hedlund across from Apache Plaza. Speaking for the request were Mr. Hedlund, his attorney, Mr. Daubney and Mr. Dale. Mr. Heibel said he didn't want to hold a Public Hearing unless there were definite changes in the proposal from those previously presented by Mr. Hedlund. Mr. Rymarchick cautioned the applicant that he had better be prepared to defend his proposal with respect to its meeting all the (3) • requirements of a PUD as established in the City Zoning Ordinance and to answer all objections to previous commercial aspects of proposals as they had been raised by neighbors and members of both the Council and Planning Board. Mr. Daubney said he was ready to provide such a de- fense, although firm commitments from specific tenants might not be possible. He said the effectuating documents would be presented to the City Attorney for comment in advance of the hearing and said Mr. Hedlund proposed to arrange for the financing of the project. Motion by Mr. Johnson and seconded by Mr. Bowerman to set a Public Hear- ing on the Hedlund proposal for a PUD on Lots 10-16 , Block 6 , Mounds View Acres Second Addition, at the Board' s next meeting on May 18 , 1977 . Motion carried unanimously. When Mr. Dale said he might not be able to attend this hearing, Mr. Daubney suggested to Mr. Hedlund that the date be changed to the Board's June meeting but Mr. Hedlund said he was willing to have the attorney make the presentation if Mr. Dale was not present for the May 18th hearing. The hearing was to remain as scheduled for May 18th. -Mr. Hiebel then apologized for the unscheduled appearance of Jack Law- rence of Signcrafters, Inc. , and William Farrell of Pizza Hut who had gotten his permisson to talk to the Board regarding a free standing sign which will require a variance to the City Sign Ordinance. The request • was for the same sign which had been voted down by the Board and tabled by the Council in September, 1976 . Minutes of'both bodies which re- flected those actions were then reviewed. Although it seemed it would be necessary only for the Council to take the matter off the table, the sign company official asked for some recommendation from the Board, in view of the time which Pizza Hut has spent waiting, for the establishment of guidelines regarding free standing signs by the Board. Mr. Farrell said he owns the Pizza Hut franchise in this area and plans to upgrade the St. Anthony operation at 3801 Stinson Boulevard to the standards of his other franchise restaurants but needed better identi- fication to make the investment worthwhile. He also wanted to change the logo on the back of the building to his company's ID and would re- move the sign on the front of the building. The Pizza Hut owner felt the poor performance of this particular restaurant was to a great extent the result of potential customers not being able to identify with the existing signage and felt the proposed sign was necessary because of the potential of high snow drifts obscuring the vision of potential customers . He said if his return on this restaurant could not be brought up to the level of his other operations, he might have to consider re- locating. The proposed sign will be 5 feet wide by 6 feet high on a 3 foot base which will make it 9 feet above grade which was considered too high by Rymarchick, Johnson and Letourneau who said they could only reluctantly consider a sign no higher than 7 feet and that height only because of the • (4) • precedent had been set at the Poppin Fresh restaurant down the street. Motion by Mr. Bowerman and seconded by Mr. Hiebel to recommend to the Council that a variance to the Sign Ordinance be granted to the Pizza Hut for the sign they propose in front of the restaurant at 3801 Stinson Boulevard because of the precedent in signing which had been set for Poppin Fresh. Voting on the motion: Aye: Bowerman, Hiebel and Cowan Nay: Letourneau, Johnson and Rymarchick � Motion not carried. � \ During the informal discussion of the matters which the Board had con- sidered that evening there was an expression of gratitude to Mr. Fornell for the excellent background research and recommendations he includes whenever an application is presented for Board action. There was also some difference of opinion on how sophisticated the drawings and plans for projects which are proposed should be required to be. Motion by Mr. Cowan and seconded by Mr. Bowerman to adjourn the meeting at 10: 10 P.M. • Motion carried unanimously. Helen Crowe Secretary I (5)