HomeMy WebLinkAboutPL MINUTES 08212001 Meeting Sheet
IIIIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIIIIIIIII
106221
Box: 36
Folder: PL MINUTES AND AGENDAS 2001
Document: PL MINUTES 08212001
t CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
3 AUGUST 21, 2001
4 7:00 P.M.
5 I. CALL TO ORDER.
6 Chair Melsha called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m.
7 II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
8 Chair Melsha invited the Council and the audience to join in the Pledge of Allegiance.
9 III. ROLL CALL.
10 Commissioners present: Chair Melsha; Vice Chair Stille, Commissioners Tillman, Hanson and
I t Thomas
12 Absent: Commissioners Steeves and Hatch.
13 Also present: Assistant City Manager Susan Henry.
14 IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA.
15 Motion by Chair Melsha, second by Vice Chair Stille, to approve the meeting agenda.
0
16 Motion carried unanimously.
17 V. PUBLIC INPUT.
18 Hearing no comments, Chair Melsha moved forward with the agenda.
t 9 VI. MEETING MINUTES.
20 6.1 Review/Approval of the Planning Commission meeting minutes of July 17, 2001.
21 The Commissioners requested the following corrections:
22 Page 7, line 4 to read: "... versus Residential, and asked what kind of demands it might
23 bring..."
24 Page 8, line 8: policeman corrected to "policemen."
25 Page 13, line 20 to read: "...stated that electronic signs are a very..."
26 Page 13, line 21 to read: "...are using is geared to maximize public input."
27 Page 13, line 22 to read: "—surrounding the public use signs, other changes..."
28 Motion by Vice Chair Stille, second by Chair Melsha, to approve the Planning Commission
29 meeting minutes of July 17, 2001, as corrected above.
30 Motion carried unanimously.
01 VII. COMMUNICATION WITH CITY COUNCIL.
32 7.1 Designate a Planning Commission member to the City Council regular meeting of August 28,
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
August 21, 2001
Page 2
t 2001.
2 Chair Melsha asked Commissioner Hanson if was available to attend the City Council regular
3 meeting of August 28, 2001. Commissioner Hanson stated he was available and would attend
4 the meeting on behalf of the Planning Commission.
5 VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS.
6 8.1 Request for Side Yard Variance: Maynard and Elizabeth Shaw, 2835 Roosevelt St SE.
7 Susan Henry informed the Commission that the Shaw's are requesting a side yard variance of
8 eleven feet in order to build a detached two-car garage measuring 22'x24' to the east of their
9 existing garage. She added that,according to City ordinance,"any side yard adjacent to a street
10 must be at least thirty feet in width." Ms.Henry continued that the proposed plans submitted to
11 the City by the Shaw's show a nineteen feet side yard setback,which is eleven feet short of the
12 ordinance requirement, and just four feet off of the property line.
13 Mr.and Mrs.Shaw came forward to address the Commission and stated that they have lived in
14 their house for twelve years. He indicated that much of their reasoning for making this request had
15 to do with the need for additional space for their cars and home maintenance equipment.
Mr.Shaw indicated that he was not aware of the fact that they needed to build thirty feet off of the
street,versus the fifteen that they had anticipated,until a building inspector came out to their home.
18 Mr. Shaw added that even the City Inspector was unfamiliar with that ordinance requirement.
19 Chair Melsha informed the Shaw's that there is certain criteria which needs to be considered
20 whenever someone is requesting a variance.
21 Commissioner Hanson indicated that Commissioner Thomas had taken a few photos of their home
22 for the Commissioner to view while discussing their request. Commissioner Hanson asked the
23 Shaw's if they had considered just adding on to their house. Mr.Shaw explained that the roof-line
24 on their house is on two levels,and that they would need to remove the entire roof,which would
25 be considerably more expensive than what they were proposing.
26 Commissioner Thomas asked about the roof to clarify what removing it would entail. He continued
27 that one problem that he had with their request was that they did not meet all of the criteria,adding
28 that the problem seemed to have more to do with the number of cars that they own. Mrs.Shaw
29 stated that they own a full-size car that barely fits into the garage, with only inches on each side.
30 Mr.Shaw echoed Mrs.Shaw's issues with the lack of room in the existing garage for even one car.
31Commissioner Thomas referred to the criteria that they consider when examining a variance request
awhich states that"no variance shall be granted unless the evidence presented by the petitioner
33 discloses all of the following facts"which continues,"the property cannot be put to a reasonable
34 use without the variance." He added that he was having difficulty with this in relation to the Shaw's
35 request.
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
August 21, 2001
Page 3
•
Chair Melsha identified their unique location where they are surrounded by three streets,which
2 limits their parking options considerably. The Shaw's agreed and indicated that they have
3 sometimes resorted to parking a car on their lawn.
4 Commissioner Thomas stated that he did not have a problem with them moving into the side yard.
5 He stated that his concerns were with the letter of the law and aesthetics. Mrs.Shaw added that
6 their total plan was a two-stage process for them to first build the two-car garage,and then remove
7 the breezeway and expand their family room.
8 Mr.Shaw stated that the total plan would have the house looking like it was originally built,just
9 fifteen feet longer.
10 Mr.Shaw showed a photo displaying what they would like to see at the end of the project at hand.
11 Chair Melsha asked if they were able to take any room off of the requested variance. Mr.Shaw
12 stated he could trim off another two feet from the curb, if necessary.
13 Commissioner Tillman stated that her difficulty was with the letter of the law in relation to the
0 hardship aspect in the criteria that they need to consider.
15 Commissioner Thomas asked about the future project. Mr.Shaw stated it consisted of removing
16 the garage door,and making an L-shaped family room with a picture window to match the existing
17 one. Mrs.Shaw added that the change would extend their life in their home,where they would
18 really like to stay in the City into retirement years..
19 Commissioner Thomas stated that the Planning Commission was in favor of residents improving
20 their homes and properties which was why he was inquiring about their future plan.
21 Commissioner Thomas asked if this was a preliminary hearing. Ms.Henry stated that it was the
22 actual hearing.
23 Commissioner Hanson asked if they would pave their new driveway. Mrs.Shaw stated that they
24 would pour concrete.
25 Vice Chair Stille asked about the square footage of their home, and number of bedrooms.
26 Mr. Shaw stated it was about 1275 square feet, with four bedrooms.
27 Chair Melsha closed the public hearing at 7:30 p.m.
Chair Melsha stated that he saw the hardship with their unique location on three streets. He added
29 that it was a considerably more difficult proj ect to remove the roof,and stated that he thought that
30 they should favor the request. Chair Melsha referred to other variance requests that they have
31 approved in the past that he thought were on less firm ground than this request.
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
August 21, 2001
Page 4
•
1 Commissioner Tillman stated that she had a hard time with the criteria to be used when considering
2 a variance that stated that"economic decisions alone are not the basis of the hardship."Chair
3 Melsha stated that he thought the other option of just adding on to the existing structure was far
4 more expensive and difficult.
5 Commissioner Thomas stated that he had no problem with approving the request,provided the
6 follow-up projects happen. Mr.Shaw stated that they have their word because it is something that
7 they really want to happen.
8 Commissioner Hanson stated that one ofthe goals of the City of St.Anthony is to improve the
9 housing stock,and,citing the three streets that they live on as the hardship,stated that he did not
10 have a problem with approving the variance.
1 1 Vice Chair Stille stated that he was concerned that the second phase would not happen,even with
12 the best of intentions. Mr.Shaw stated that his interest is getting the two car garage,Mrs.Shaw's
13 interest is in getting the larger family room, thus, indicating that it would get done.
14 Vice Chair Stille asked what kind of precedence they were setting for all of the other homeowners
40 of single-car garages that may come forward requesting variances.
16 Commissioner Thomas stated that the three streets were what set this apart from other single-car
17 garages. Chair Melsha stated that another feature with their lot is that they would not be edging
18 up to the lot-line of another home in order to do the project.
19 Commissioner Thomas Citing hardship that they are surrounded by three streets,the expense of
20 tearing off the existing roof,
21 Vice Chair Stille added that they refer to the structural change, rather than the expense.
22 Commissioner Tillman added the parking hardship.
23 Citing hardship found in the unique location of the home,the unique roof-line of their home,and
24 the street parking restrictions that the Shaw's face, the Planning Commission decided to
25 recommend approval to the City Council for the variance request.
26 Motion by Commissioner Thomas,second by Commissioner Hanson to approve the request for
27 side yard variance at 2835 Roosevelt Street NE.
28 Motion carried unanimously.
PIX. INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION.
0 9.1 Northwest Ouadrant Redevelopment.
31 Ms. Henry informed the Commission that the same two concepts presented at the July 17
32 Planning Commission meeting were accepted by the City Council for the Northwest Quadrant.
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
August 21, 2001
• Page 5
1 She added that they would be requesting proposals for the project from developers this fall.
2
3 Ms. Henry also stated that the City Council commended the Planning Commission on their
4 leadership thus far in the process.
5 Ms. Henry stated that members of city staff will accompany Jim Prosser, Ehlers and
6 Associates, at a meeting with the Metropolitan Council this fall to discuss the specifics of the
7 project.
s Vice Chair Stille asked if the financial aspect would be discussed at that Metropolitan Council
9 meeting. Ms. Henry stated that she thought the topic would certainly come up.
10 Commissioner Thomas stated that City Councilmember Sparks forwarded the Metropolitan
I 1 Council web-site on to him, which has some information on the residential component of the
12 Northwest Quadrant project.
13 9.2 Electronic Sign Amendment.
14 Chair Melsha indicated that the only change to the amendment was the off-hours of the sign.
0 The off-hours were changed to 10:00 p.m.-6:00 a.m.
16 9.3 Antenna Ordinance Review/Discussion.
17 Chair Melsha asked for feedback from the Commission on the outline of the antenna ordinance.
18 Commissioner Thomas asked if there was any discussion given to camouflaging in terms of
19 making it appear to be a part of the building. Chair Melsha indicated that they have discussed
20 the issue. He continued that they are trying to steer towards city-owned property, specifically
21 the water tower.
22 Chair Melsha stated that they are attempting to set up a system where there would be certain
23 designated areas where a conditional use permit would not be necessary. He added that they
24 needed to determine which areas would be separated out from the rest, as well as the specifics
25 of a conditional use permit.
26 Chair Melsha referred to city-owned property and that there would presumably be less of an
27 aesthetic concern, indicating that a conditional use permit may not be necessary.
28 Commissioner Tillman asked if the schools would have power on school property. Chair
29 Melsha stated that they would, and asked that they would need to determine if they wanted the
30 schools to be exempt from the conditional use permit as part of the overlay district.
0
31 Commissioner Tillman stated her only concern was with the parks where there may be variable
32 opinion among the community and city in terms of the best location for a WTF (Wireless
33 Telecommunications Facility). Chair Melsha stated that they could leave parks out.
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
August 21, 2001
Page 6
2 Vice Chair Stille stated that the city owned the parks, and, therefore, could determine the
3 construction of WTFs. He continued that the parks were not as great a concern to him as the
a schools, suggesting that they leave the schools out of the designated area. Stille suggested that
5 they be safe and exclude school-owned property. Chair Melsha stated that he agreed with his
6 suggestion.
7 Chair Melsha stated to look into escrow funding to curb the expense.
s Commissioner Thomas stated that a WTF would likely go in higher areas, and that the schools
9 were not necessarily an issue.
10 The Commission discussed the problem with the many "dead spots"on cellular telephones in
11 the City of St. Anthony.
12 Chair Melsha stated that they wanted to have basic requirements for WTFs. He continued that,
13 beyond that, there are two different areas: routine areas where a conditional use permit would
14 not be necessary, and areas where aesthetics and safety were more of an issue would require a
45 conditional use permit.
16 Chair Melsha stated he would like to see more WTFs on the water tower.
17 Commissioner Tillman confirmed that they could not turn down a request for a conditional use
18 permit and then instruct the company to place the WTF on the water tower instead of the
19 requested area.
20 Commissioner Thomas asked if the Apache site would fall into the conditional use permit.
21 Chair Melsha stated that was true.
22 Commissioner Tillman asked if they had enough financial incentive to go to the areas that they
23 are discussing. Vice Chair Stille stated that the market determines that aspect.
24 Chair Melsha stated that the antennas on top of roofs are not generally a problem, as they are
25 usually well hidden.
26 Commissioner Tillman mentioned the property owner who would take less money than the
27 commercial property owner who might be willing to go through the conditional use permit.
28 Chair Melsha agreed with Commissioner Tillman's point.
09 Commissioner Hanson asked about the height portion of the outline. Chair Melsha stated that it
30 was a typographical error and that they would choose one height.
31 Commissioner Thomas asked if they wanted to keep the 75 foot maximum height. Chair
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
August 21, 2001
Page 7
1 Melsha stated that they did, which included having the capacity to expand to 75 feet.
2 Commissioner Thomas stated that he liked the overlay district idea.
3 Ms. Henry stated she would make these mentioned changes to the outline and pass it along to
4 the City Attorney for drafting an ordinance to look at at the next meeting..
5 Chair Melsha indicated that they could still make changes to the Antenna Ordinance in the
6 future.
7 X. ANNOUNCEMENTS.
8 Chair Melsha stated that he received a note from John Shardlow thanking the Commission for their
9 work on the Northwest Quadrant project.
10 Ms. Henry stated that there had not been much information from the housing code sub-committee and
11 suggested they schedule a meeting to derive an outline similar to the Antenna Ordinance that they
12 reviewed his evening.
�3 Commissioner Thomas suggested he and Commissioner Hanson meet with Ms. Henry and comprise
4 some notes for review for next time.
15 Commissioner Hanson asked if the Central Park project had been approved. Commissioner Tillman
16 stated that it had received approval.
17 XI. ADJOURNMENT.
18 Motion by Chair Melsha, second by Commissioner Hanson, to adjourn the meeting at 8:26 p.m.
19 Motion carried unanimously.
20 Respectfully submitted,
21 Courtney Seesz
22 Timesaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
0