Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001.11.28 PC MinutesBUTES >a rLMNG coMlv>ss><ON NOVEMBER 2$ 20E11: Call to Order Chairperson Schumann called the meeting to order at 6:37 p.m. PRESENT: Kleissler, Malaski, McRoberts, Peltier, Rooney, Rosenquist, Schumann ALSO PRESENT: John Rask, Community Development Director Michele Lindau, Planning Commission Secretary Minutes for October 24, 2001 Rooney made motion, Kleissler seconded, to approve the minutes for October 24, 2001 as submitted. Ayes: Kleissler, McRoberts, Rooney, Rosenquist, Schumann Abstain: Malaski, Peltier Motion carried. Minutes for October 30, 2001 Malaski made motion, Peltier seconded, to approve the minutes for October 30, 2001 as submitted. Ayes: Kleissler, Malaski, Peltier, Rooney, Rosenquist, Schumann Abstain: McRoberts Motion carried. Culp & Danner Minor Subdivision The Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the request of Bill Culp and Norman Danner for a minor subdivision and two variances to allow the division of a 20 -acre parcel into two 10 -acre parcels on property located at 14707 Irish Avenue North. One variance would be from the minimum lot width of 300 feet required in the Agricultural zoning district. The existing parcel is narrow with 553.5 feet road frontage. The proposed lot split would create two lots, each with a road frontage of 276.75 feet. As such, a variance of 23.25 feet would be necessary for each lot. The other variance requested is from the 40 -foot side yard setback requirement. Proposed Parcel A to the north contains the existing home as well as an existing 1,080 square foot garage. With the proposed subdivision, the existing garage on Parcel A would be located 19.09 feet from the property line. The minimum side yard setback in the Agricultural zoning district is 40 feet; therefore, a variance of 20.91 feet would be necessary for Parcel A. This request went before the Planning Commission on November 16, 1994. The Planning Commission unanimously recommend approval of the minor subdivision as well as the two variances; however, the variance from the side yard setback was for only one foot because at the time of the request the minimum side yard setback was 20 feet in the Agricultural district. At the City Council meeting November 21, 1994, the Council unanimously approved the request. The applicant had provided evidence of approved septic sites for each lot from Washington County as well as approval from the Rice Creek Watershed District. Parkland dedication fees had been paid at that time. The request is again before the Planning Commission and the City Council because the minor subdivision had not been recorded with Washington County in the allotted time required by ordinance. Minor subdivisions must be recorded with the Washington County Recorder's Office within 60 days of City Council approval or such approval becomes null and void. Due to the potential conflict of interest the Community Development Director had with the request, the Community Development Assistant prepared and presented the staff report to the Planning Commission. Staff recommended approval of the request because it met all the necessary standards outlined in the Subdivision Regulations and Zoning Ordinance for approval. Members of the Planning Commission had questions for the applicant regarding the request; however, the applicant was not in attendance at the meeting. Malaski made motion, McRoberts seconded, to table the request until the next meeting of the Planning Commission to allow the applicant an opportunity to be present to answer questions. Aye: Kleissler, Malaski, McRoberts, Schumann Nay: Peltier, Rooney, Rosenquist Motion carried. Thommes & Thomas Land Clearing Special Use Permit Renewal On October 24, 2001, the Planning Commission considered the request of Thommes and Thomas Land Clearing, 5726-165`h Street North. The Commission tabled action on the request in order to receive a legal opinion from the City Attorney regarding whether conditional use permits can be sunsetted or renewed, the status of the existing conditional use permit, and whether conditional use permits ran with the property or with the particular owner or operator. In review of the matter concerning the termination of the permit, the City Attorney opined that the City cannot set time limits on conditional use permits. With regard to restricting the use to Thommes and Thomas only, staff noted that conditional use permits run with the property, not a particular owner or operator. Staff had inspected the property and found it to be in compliance with the conditions of approval. Staff recommended approval of the conditional use permit renewal, subject to the same general conditions, excluding the condition stating a termination date for the permit and the condition restricting the use to Thommes and Thomas. Schumann reopened the public hearing but there were no comments, so he closed the public hearing. Malaski asked the applicant about the noise and smoke emitted from the burner. John Thommes, from Thommes & Thomas, said the burner was powered by a 4 cylinder John Deere Motor, and he had been operating it for the past two years with no complaints. The Community Development Director said that property owners within 350 feet of the site had been sent notice of their application to renew the conditional use permit. Rooney questioned how the burner could operate 24 hours per day if the Conditional Use Permit only allowed them to operate from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Mr. Thommes said there was someone there after the hour of 7:00 p.m. to operate the burner only. Rooney suggested the conditional use permit be worded to apply the hours of operation to traffic at the site and not the use of the burner. Malaski said she felt 7:00 p.m. was too late to be operating on a Saturday night and Thommes agreed to change the Saturday hours from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Rooney asked about the condition requiring them to plant trees along the south property line as screening. Thommes said the trees had been planted some time ago and the neighboring property owner had planted trees as well. Rooney suggested the condition be changed to state they will not diminish the screening and Thommes said they would be removing some trees during a wetland project he was working on with the Rice Creek Watershed District. Sandy asked that the condition be changed to require that the site be replenished by larger trees than those removed. Rooney made motion, Peltier seconded, to recommended approval of renewal of the conditional use permit with the changes suggested by staff and those discussed by the Commission this evening. All Ayes. Motion carried. Molitor/Cheeta Rezoning On September 26, 2001, the Planning Commission tabled a City -initiated rezoning of property located west of Fenway, south of 140`h Street, and north of the Townhomes of Bald Eagle (Tschida and Molitor properties). The Commission generally agreed that the Tschida property should remain residential, and that it may be appropriate to consider a rezoning of the Molitor property. However, given the proximity of adjacent residential properties, the Planning Commission found that the City's current General Industrial District may not be appropriate for the site. As such, the Planning Commission appointed a committee to explore potential uses and zoning options for the site. The Committee consisted of Commissioners Patrick Rooney and Bob Rosenquist, Developers Len Pratt and Tom Junilla, Council Member Mike Granger, and Community Development Director John Rask. The committee met on November 14, 2001 to discuss potential options for the property. The committee examined in detail the natural features of the Molitor site and found that given the location of wetlands and floodplain that much of the site could not accommodate larger building footprints commonly found in industrial developments. However, the committee found that the site could accommodate smaller office building pads. The Committee met again on November 27, 2001, and concluded that both the Molitor and Cheeta properties should be considered in the adoption of a new office zoning district given the close proximity of the two parcels. The committee decided to meet again to discuss the potential uses in this district and hold a public hearing on the rezoning at the Planning Commission meeting of December 19, 2001. Rosenquist made motion, Peltier seconded, to recommend denial of the rezoning from Multi -Family to General Industrial, and to schedule a public hearing to consider adoption of a new zoning district to included office type uses. All Ayes. Motion carried. Granger & Granger L.L.P. Site Plan Approval for 14849 Forest Blvd. N. The Planning Commission considered the request of Granger & Granger, L.L.P. for site plan approval for a 1,800 square foot addition to the existing building located at 14849 Forest Blvd. The addition would be located on the east side of the existing building and would meet all required building setbacks. The building would be occupied by general retail and service businesses. The applicant would also add a new facade to the building and improve the parking lot to accommodate 37 parking stall and construction of a barrier type curb. Access to the property was provided from Highway 61 and 148`h Street with the access along 148`h Street generally unrestricted, which has created an unsafe situation. The proposed parking lot construction would close all the existing access points with the exception of the 148`h access located on the far east side of the site and a barrier curb would be installed to control access. The proposed parking lot would encroach approximately six feet into the right-of-way of 148'h Street north to allow two-way traffic circulation in the parking lot. Staff found that the requested encroachment would greatly enhance traffic circulation on the site, and would allow the applicant to close the unsafe accesses. The City's Public Works Director had reviewed the site plan and found it acceptable. There are no utilities on this side of the street that would be impacted by the encroachment. A formal encroachment agreement would be required to allow the parking lot to encroach into the public right-of-way. A landscape plan had been provided showing a variety of shrubs and ornamental trees near the foundation of the building. The proposed plan showed no exterior lighting. The applicant said he would install lighting on the building by each entrance, and he felt there was sufficient lighting from adjacent buildings and the street light at the corner of Highway 61 and 1481h Street North. Staff found that the requested site plan complies with the applicable ordinance requirements and would improve traffic safety and the aesthetics of the site and building. Malaski made motion, Peltier seconded, to recommend approval of the site plan for 14849 Forest Boulevard with the conditions as stated in the draft resolution. All Ayes. Motion carried. Reschedule December 26th Meeting to December 191h Peliter Made motion, Malaski seconded, to move the December 26, 2001 Planning Commission meeting to December 19, 2001. All Ayes. Motion carried. Joint Workshop with the City Council on December 1, 2001 The Community Development Director reminded the Planning Commission of the joint workshop to be held on Saturday, December 1, 2001, at the Hugo Fire Hall at 9:00 a.m. to discuss roles and responsibilities and changes to the land use regulation. Schedule Street Width Discussion for December Staff will be providing information on street widths to the Planning Commission for their review. The Planning Commission agreed to discuss street widths at the December meeting. Planning Commission Meeting Schedule Due to the anticipated increase in planning requests, Malaski suggested the Planning Commission revisit the issue of additional meetings of the Planning Commission. The Commission agreed to discuss it at the December meeting. Adiournment Peltier made motion, Kleissler seconded, to adjourn at 7:15 p.m. All Ayes. Motion carried. Michele Lindau, Secretary Planning Commission