Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC 05-01-2002 ------- MINUTES CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION , WEDNESDAY, MAY 1, 2002 7:30 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER Chair Sand called the meeting to order at 7:38 p,m. ROLL CALL Present were Chair David Sand, Commissioners Ken Bezdieek, Terri Duchenes, Therese Galatowitsch, Brad Lemberg, Megan Ricke, and Clayton Zimmennan. Absent: None. Also present were Councilmcmber Beverly Aplikowski, COIU1cilmember Lois Rem, City Planner Aaron Parrish, City Engineer Nick Landwer, and Recording Secretary Kathleen Altman, APPROV AL OF MINUTES FROM PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON APRIL 3, 2002. " Commissioner Zinunerman requested the following changes/revisions: Page 1, Change starting time of meeting to 7:30 p.m. Page 2, 4th paragraph, should read".. .50 it was his feeling we should not expect a park dedication in this case". Page 2, last paragraph note that Chair Sand and Commissioner Zimmerman voted nay. Page 3, 4th paragraph should read, "Commissioner Zimmerman pointed out this was an R-l residential neighborhood, in which a church was allowcd to run a dav care.. ," Commissioner Ricke requested the following changcs/revisions: Page 10, the motion should state: The motion canied (5-1-1) (Commissioner Zimmerman nay; Commissioner Ricke abstained). Commissioner Zimmennan moved, seconded by Commissioner Ricke to approve the April 3, 2002 minutes as amended. The motion carried unanimously (7-0). CASE #02-07 - PRELIMINARY PLAT REVIEW AND VARIANCE, THOMAS & KATHLEEN GOSERUD, 4350 HAMLINE A VENUE NORTH - PUBLIC HEARING Chair Sand opened the public hearing at 7:40 p.m. Staffreviewed their report dated April 24, 2002. Staffreviewed the five findings necessary for a variance. Staff recommended approval of the request based on the findings therein. . Commissioncr Zimmerman askcd if the property to the south was also owned by the applicant. Mr. Parrish replied that was correct. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - MAY 1,2002 2 . Commissioner Zimmern1an asked ifthe lot to the south was a conforming lot and the width of that lot. Mr. Parrish replied the lot was conforming and the width was 95 feet. Commissioner Zimmerman stated when tbey had looked at a subdivision proposal a couple of months ago there was a concern with the road having sufficient access for emergency vehicles. Mr. Parrish replied project had been reviewed by the Fire Department and they had no concerns regarding thc access. Scott Tolson, stated he opposed this proposal because it put the road right along his back lot line, He exprcssed eoncem that that was already a low-lying area and had drainage issues. He also expressed concern about the snow and debris that would get swcpt off of the road, and the excess getting swept into his yard. He stated when they purchased their lot, it was with the understanding that there was a nursery and Christmas tree sales on that lot, but he was disappointed that there was now going to be a road. He expressed concern about his value and enjoyment of his property, Joanne Pastorius, opposed this proposal due to safety issues and having an access onto Hamline Avenue. She indicated there was no natural frontage to this home. She stated this home would be looking into thcir back yards. She expressed concern about drainage also. Chair Sand closed the public hearing at 7:50 p,m. , Chair Sand asked what the rcquirements were with respect to sctback for a driveway for a lot. Mr. Parrish replied they were actually able to go to the property line with a driveway, Chair Sand asked if the elevations proposed for constructing the driveway would raise the existing elevations, or would they be kept or lowered. The City Engineer, Nick Landwer, replied they would review any drainage plans before approval. Chair Sand asked if the City Engineer had been out to the site. Mr. Landwer replied he had not. Chair Sand indicated this was apparently a lower area that remained wet. He requested allY review take into account any potential runoff and exacerbation of any drainage problems, He asked if any drainage problem was made worse, would this be a rejection of the request. Mr. Parrish replied if there was a potential for drainage issues, a building pem1it would not be issned. Commissioner Zimmennan asked what was required for access for a lot such as this. Mr. Parrish replied the requirement was strcet frontage to have access to a public street. In this instance, there was only a small access to a public street for the strip ofland going back to the property. He stated the standard street requirement was 50-60 feet. He indicated this request wanted a private access variance to allow access to Parcel B. He stated this was not done with great regularity within the community; typically this was . done arOlllld the lakes. He noted this was not standard, but it was not unusual either. Commissioner Zimmerman asked if the purpose of this was to guarantee the lot to the south would not be made unbuildable. Mr. Panish replied that was a part of the intention. ---.- ARDEN HILLS PLAN1\ING COMMISSION - MAY I, 2002 3 -- Commissioner Duehenes stated it seemed to her that there would need to be a reciprocal '., easement. She indicated the survey showed the existing drive going into the next lot. She asked ifthere would be an easement that would benefit the lot to the south, or would there be all access to Hamline A venue in the future. Mr. Parrish replied that was an existing condition, and currently applicant used that for overflow parking for the nursery business. He stated the nursery sales and Christmas tree sales would not be allowed if this was approved. Commissioner Duchenes asked what would it take for this to be considered an alley. Mr. Parrish replied that the City did not allow for alleys at this time. Chair Sand expressed concern that without a drainage plan it could not be known how this proposal would affect thc ncighbors, He requested if the drainage, utility, grading plans showed this would allect the neighbors, this not be approved, Commissioner Galatowitsch stated she could not find any special conditions that would deprive applicant the use oflhe land. She stated there was a home on the lot in a residential district. She indicated granting a variance could be detrimental to the sUlTounding property owners, and she did not believe this would be a good precedence to set in this area. She stated shc was not in favor of this request. Commissioner Galatowitscb moved, seconded by Commissioner Zimmennan, to deny I Casc #02-07, 4350 Hamline Avenue North, Thomas & Kathleen Goserud Preliminary Plat Rcview, for the reasons there are no special conditions that would deprive applicant of the usc of the land; the variance could be detrimental to the surrounding property owners; and this was not a good precedence to set in this area, The motion carried llllanimously (7-0). CASE #02-08 - PRELIMINARY PLAT REVIEW, GUIDANT CORPORATION, 4100 HAMLlNE A VENUE NORTH - PUBLIC HEARING Staff reviewed their report April 25, 2002 and recommended approval of the preliminary plat for the reasons contained therein. Chair Sand opened the public bearing at 8 :05 p.m. Commissioner Zimmerman stated he believed they were putting thc cart before the horse, He noted the Planning Commission could not act on replatting until Council addresscd the vacating of Femwood. Mr. Parrish replied the City Attomey indicated if the plat did receive preliminary approval, the actual vacation of property and casements could bc considered concurrent with the final platting ofthc property. Chair Sand stated he agrccd with Commissioner Zimmernlan, He stated he was reluctant . to go forward with this tonight without the traffic study. He stated he wanted to know what the traffic impact would havc at Cummings Park Drive for both Arden Hills, as well as the surrounding communities. He statcd he would be in favor of tabling this for more infonnation about the traffic study. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - MAY 1,2002 4 , Commissioner Galatowitsch stated therc were certain critcria required in order for a street vacation, and requested staff to indicate what that criteria was. Mr. Parrish replied the main criterion was if the City did not have a need for the road anymore. Hc stated vacations were something that the Plalllling Commission would look at. He indicated he would provide updated information with respect to the vacation requirements. Commissioner Zimmennan stated two other conditions should be thc City Council approving vacation of Fernwood and thc approval of the vacation of the easement along Femwood because without those two items happening, thc two parcels could not be consolidated. Mr. Pamsh agrced and indicted this was an oversight on his part Commissioner Lemberg stated utility easements would need to be retained. Mr. Parrish replied that was correct. Commissioner Lembcrg also agreed with Chair Sand that thc traffic study needed to be looked at before the Commission could make any decisions, Chair Sand rcquested staff research if this was consistcnt with the Comprehensive Plan. Chair Sand asked if applicants wallted to give a presentation. J olm Larson and Judd Brasch, RSP Architects; Dave Reimer of Guidant; Dan Riehle of Guidant; David Abbey of Parsons Engineering; and John Krausserl of Rehder I Engineering. Mr. Larson gave a presentation of Guidant's proposal. He stated they wanted to initiate a workgroup within the next two weeks consisting ofresidcnts of Arden Hills, Arden Hills staff, representatives of the City of Shoreview, County Representatives, Guidant staff, etc. to look at the traffic issues, Mr. Abbcy stated the traffic study ranged all of the way from Highway 96 to Interstate 694 and looked at the year 2025 as well as the current year. He stated they were finishing up on the future year issues at this time, He gavc a brief presentation on Guidant's proposal regarding the traffic, Commissioner Lemberg asked if there would be split work shifts. Mr. Larson replied Guidant had three shifts and the traffic varied at diffcrent times. C01111nissioner Zimmerman expressed concern about the increase of traffic on Lexington Avenue if the Guidant facility was full with 8,000 cars. Hc asked how many cars were able to exit per cycle and how many cycles would it take to exit all of the vchicles. Mr. Abbey replied they had not figured this out yet, but he believed all of the vehicles would be cycled out within an hour. Mr. Larson pointed out that Lexington Avenue was not the only access that would be . used. There were other accesses to get in and out of the facility. Mr. Larson stated they wanted to work with the neighbors regarding traffic. He stated it was incumbent upon Guidant to use the best access off of the campus. He indicated the traffic study they had tied to the PuTI and the numbers they reached were a worse case senario. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - MAY I, 2002 5 , Chair Sand requested the traffic report show volumes over time, as well as the impact it would have on the City Park, He stated access to that park was necessary and the access off of Lexington A venue would be used for the park. He stated access to the park had to bc takcn into account. He asked how they were going to prevent people from winding their way through the campus and existing onto Hamline Avenue. Mr. Larson stated this was a possibility, but it would not be a convenient way to get to Hamline Avenue. He stated through the design of the roads and parking lot, as well as the design of the campus, would addrcss traffic cutting across to Hamlinc Avenue. Chair Sand stated he was concemed the traffic engineer had not addressed Femwood. He asked if Fernwood would still be a drivable surface if it would be eventually vacated. Mr. Larson stated Fernwood would be a service road for emergency and service vehicles only. He statcd using Femwood would not be an advantage for employees to access or leave the campus from Fernwood. Pat Kren, I230 Wyncrest Court, stated Guidant had been a good neighbor. He stated it was not necessary to combine all of their lots into one lot at this time. He indicated this would not solve their problem, He stated the aceess to Cummings Park was Femwood A venue and this was very much appreciated by the parents as a direct access to the park. He stated if Fernwood Avenue was vacated, there would be more traffic on Lexington Avenue. He expressed coneem about adding anothcr light on Lexington and the backup that would create. He stated as a member of the Park/Trails Recreation Committee, he proposed that Femwood Avenuc not be vacated to allow acccss to Cummings Park. e Bill Frank, 1228 Wymidge Drive, stated he was in favor of development generally and was generally in favor of the development of this site. However, he had two concems. First, the process irregularities and inefficiencies, and second, the staff rcport and recommendations lacked the interest to protect the interest of the community. He stated Fernwood Avenue was a major thoroughfare. He indicated there was no Master Plan, and no study of the impacts on tbe area. He indicated there was no substantial community involvement. He asked where the Master Plan was that would justify the vacation of Femwood Avenue. He stated without the Master Plan, Guidant should not be here tonight. He asked where the traffic study was, and why was Guidant making this request at this time without the traffic study. He asked if the City knew what impacts this was going to have on the community. He asked where the EIS was, and was it consistent with the Comprehensive plan. He asked where the County's approval was. He stated with all of this missing information, this application should be denied. He stated the staff report was inaccurate and summarized what he believed was inaccurate in thc report. He asked if staff had looked at the impact this development would have on Cummings Park with the increased use of the park. He stated the Master Plan needed to be presented and approved before this should move allY further forward. He stated the plat application was premature; there was no justification for it at this time. He stated all of the items and concems he had spoken about needed to be addressed by Guidant before the Commission approved or even considered this request. . Judy Frank, 1228 Wymidge Drive, stated shc did not trust Guidant and she did not trust the architects. She stated the reason for her feeling this was that two months ago Guidallt had a meeting with the residents and the residents expressed their concems and the residents never heard anything again from Guidant. She expressed concern that Guidant ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - MAY 1, 2002 6 , was moving too quickly. She stated Guidant had previously stated they would have another mecting with the neighbors, which they have not. Joe Frecke (?sp), expressed concern about the impact of traffic on Lexington Avenue and the vacation of Fernwood Avenue. He agreed with all ofthe previous comments made, Brad Kressler, I 25 I Wyncrest Court, stated the Guidant proposal could be good for Arden Hills if done properly, but the expansion needed to be done on a reasonable and informed basis. He statcd the traffic analysis, including the County's input, needed to be done before this could proceed any further. He cxpressed concern about the plans coming before the City so quickly, without the Master Plan being evaluated and looked at. He stated if these plans were approved, the City would have less flexibility in the futurc and would get "stuck" with what was previously approved, without having sufficient information. He stated they needed to look at intersections of 35W and 96, 694 and Lexington, local streets, as well as major intersections as to how traffic was coming in. He asked what the effects of thc traffic would be. He urged the Commission to deny the request. Stan , 1277 Nursery Hill Lane, stated Guidant was a good neighbor and he wanted thcm to prosper, but he expressed concern that this was the first step in an overall plan. Hc believed Guidant knew what the Master Plan was al1d they were not being flexible. He urged the Commission to deny the request. He stated this project was putting a lot of traffic pressure in an already congested area. He pointed out that Guidant's previous , proposal was to use the main entrance to the south, but it appears they no longer intended this to be a main entrance. Carl Oelker, 1286 Wyncrest Lal1e, stated there was no more room tor Guidant in this community. He asked why Guidant did not leave the community and why Guidant wanted to subj ect their employees to this kind of an environn1ent with respect to traffic Issues. He stated he did not like Guidant, and did not believe Guidant was a good neighbor. He stated the roads would not support an additional 5,000 cars. He stated he hoped Guidant went away and he was willing to pay the additional taxes if they left. Dave Carlind of CSM Corporation al1d Brian Durand of Fair Isaac (?sp). David Carlind stated in general they supported Guidant. Ultimately they wanted to be in a position to support their Master Plan when it arrived, but they were not close to this at this time. He stated they were supportive of some growth on the campus, but not necessarily on the large scope Guidant was proposing. Hc expressed concem about the increase in traffic and losing Fernwood Avenue. He stated at this point in time they were skeptical. Jim Fitgerald, expressed concern about traffic on Hamline Avenue and County Road F. He statcd at the very least, a traffic light would have to be put there. He requested they include Hamline A venue and County Road F in the traffic study as well. Mosou , 42 ~ Harnline, stated Guidant was not a good neighbor. He cxpressed , concern abont the traffic issues brought up previously on both Hamline A venuc and Lexington Avenue. Vincent Anderson, 1325 Karth Lake Circle, asked if the current water system could handle the extra load. Mr. Parrish replied given the fact that staff had not specifically ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION uu MAY 1, 2002 7 , examined a Master Plan, they were not sure, but on a preliminary basis, the utilities would be adequate, but this would need to be looked at and approved once the Master Plan was submitted. The City Engineer replicd utilities would be something they would look at on the Master Plan level. Jim Sandfeld, 1367 , statcd something felt wrong about this whole proposal. He stated he had only been in the area for about a year, so he could not comment on Guidant being a good ncighbor or not, but he was concemed about the increase in traffic. He stated it came down to a fundamental decision. He stated the City needed to decide if they were for the community, or if they \vere for big business, He stated there were other places that would fit Guidant's needs better. He stated this was a residential area. He urged the Commission to deny this request. Tim Allen, I234 Wynridgc Drive, stated with the height of the projeeted building, ramps, etc. he expressed concem about the lights and noise, He stated hc wanted no part of this type of an environment. He indicated something like this would really ruin his environment for him. He statcd he was not opposed to Guidant growing, but it needed to be contained and managed and it appeared this was not being controlled alld managcd at this time, He urged the Commission to deny this request. , Maxine Oelker, 1286 Wyncrest Lane, expressed concem about the safety issues for emergency vehicles and the children in the area. She stated part of the reason people live in thc suburbs was because of safety. She stated currently emergency vehicles could not move on Lcxington Avenue dLlring rush hour. She urged the Commission to deny this request. She stated the residents felt this was being "crammed" down their throats. Chair Sand closed the public hearing at 9:47 p.m. Commissioner Ricke moved, seconded by Commissioner Lemberg, to table Planning Case #02-08, Preliminary Plat, Guidant Corporation, 4100 Hamline Avenue for additional information such as a traffic study, input from the workgroup committee, impact on Cummings Park, and impact on traffic due to Guidant's shift work. The motion carried unanimously (7-0). Chair Sand recessed the meeting at 9:51 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 10:00 p.m. Commissioner Ricke moved, seconded by Commissioner Zimmcrman to extend the meeting past 10:00 p.m. The motion carried (6-0) (Commissioner Lemberg was not present for the vote). UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS , CASE #02-06 - PILGRIM HOUSE, SPECIAL USE PERMIT ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - MAY 1, 2002 8 , Staff stated this case was heard at the Monday City Council meeting and the Council had retumed it back to the Planning Commission to consider further information and recommendation. Mr. Parrish summarized the State law and City Zoning Ordinance lor daycare facilities. Commissioner Lcmberg inquired about the fully enclosed play area. He asked if there would be screening along the southem property line. Mr. Panish stated he believed applicant had agreed to some type of screening, but this could also be made as a condition of their approval. Al Lima, stated he was a member of Pilgrim House and was the Chairman of the Board of Pilgrim House. He spoke in support of the request. He believed the daycare would be a good community service and a good use of the building. He stated there was the need for a good, quality daycare in the conununity. He stated the building was available and not used during the day and therefore this was a good location for a daycare. He stated they were willing to work with the neighbors and would address issues they had as they arose. Julie Carlson, Director of Dayeare, stated the daycare would be for preschool children from ages of 33 months to the first day of kindergarten. She stated this was a highly structured, educational program. Shc indicated the daycare that was closing had been in their location for 19 yems and had a good rcputation. She indicated there were not many , daycares in the area that were located in a convenient location. Shc stated it would take a long time to get a daycare facility up to 20 childrcn, She noted daycarc enrollments had been down in the last couple of years, but they did want the opportunity to grow at some time in the future. Commissioner Ricke asked how long Ms, Carlson had been with her current daycare. Ms. Carlson replied two years. Commissioner Ricke asked if this was a scheduled progralll. Ms. Carlson replied it was a very scheduled progralll. However, if the weather was inclement, the children would not be outside, Sbe stated their program was well supervised and they did not allow the children to run around wild outside. The children would be kept under control at all times. Commissioner Rickc asked how early the children would be outsidc during the day. Ms. Carlson replied usually around noon, but if it was an exceptionally nice day, they may be out earlier. Jean Hoffineister, l201 Karth Lake Drive, stated she was present at the previous meeting alld was representing the neighbors in her area, She stated she had lived in her house since 1980. She gave a history of the church and area. She stated the area was much different now since when they moved in. She stated as the church grew, changes were I made. She expressed concern about thc play area. She stated none of the neighbors were opposed to chiIdcare or having childcarc there, but tbe play area was too close to their home and this was a concem. She stated she realized the Church was willing to put some type of screening, but it would still be vcry close. She stated if the play area was moved to anothcr location on the property, this would eliminate a lot of the neighbor's concerns. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - MAY 1, 2002 9 , She stated once this was approved, the neighbors had no way of controlling this. She expressed coneem about having 20 children at the daycare facility. She understood that these were small children, but she did not believe there was anything that would hold to having a smaller number of children. She stated this was a business and they would strive to eventually get their enrollment of 20 children. She cxpressed concern that there was nothing saying that the children would be under the agc of five. She asked the Commission to take these things into consideration. Gloria Fuller, 1193 Amble Drive, expressed eoncelTl about the play area and the location of it. She stated the children needed more room. She asked how many daycarc centers they needed in the area, when there was a daycare facility a little over the mile down the road. Eugene Lane, Lino Lakes, stated he had been a member of Pilgrim House for 10 years and was currently on the building committee. He spoke in favor of the daycare facility. He stated Pilgrim House had been a proactive neighhor for over 30 years and they appreciated the concerns of the neighbors and would address all of their concerns, He stated they would be willing to consider moving the playground area to another location on the facility. He stated the building was heated year round and they see a need in the community for a daycare facility. He stated this was a wholesome business that could be run out of Pilgrim House. He stated this was an excellent opportunity to take advantage of an excellent business that would provide a good atmosphere for children to grow. I Chair Sand asked if the Commission could express in the Special Use Permit the age group of the children. Mr. Parrish replied that might be too specific of a condition relative to the Planning Commission's consideration of the request. He stated he did not know what would be accomplished by specifying the ages of the children. COlllillissioner Ricke stated the neighbors were concerned that older children were more independent that were more likely to rom, or be involved in louder games, etc. She asked if they limited the ages at this time, they could always come back alld revise the Special Use Permit. Commissioner Zimmerman stated once they approved or disapproved the daycare facility based on the currcnt Ordinance, it would be up to the State to set the regulations for the daycare center. He stated license had to be applied for and certain requirements had to be met before this would be approved by the State. He stated this was not a part of what they were deciding and controlling. It was the City's responsibility to only approve or disapprove a daycare center at this location. Chair Sand stated he believed the City had the authority to set conditions on something that would affect the City, Commissioner Duchenes stated she believed this type of a condition was too limiting and she requested they obtain legal opinion before putting this type of a condition on a , daycare. Commissioner Galatowitsch stated if Arden Hills could offer this type of a daycare facility, it would be a bonus to the residents and the working mothers in the community. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - MAY], 2002 10 , Commissioner Duchenes stated within Arden Hills there was already a daycare facility being run within a public school that was not being mn by someone in the school distlict, so this had already been addressed previously in the City. Ms, Rizbi, stated she was in support of the daycare facility and she saw a need in the eommunity for this type of a facility. She indicated this would be a small group sctting and not a large daycare facility, She stated finding such a facility such as this daycare was vcry difficult. She stated this was a type of service they should want to provide to the community. She stated the smaller children were not as noisy as school age children. She stated due to safety issues, the children are not allowed to be outside unsupervised. She stated their philosophy was to keep the daycare facility small for the children who needed such a setting to get prepared for kindergarten. Commissioner Lemberg asked where the most appropriate place for the play structure would be. Mr. Parrish replicd he bad not looked at another location for the play structure, but it was possible it could be relocated, Chair Sand stated wherever the play structure ended up would be negotiated between the Church and the neighbors. Commissioner Duchenes moved, seconded by Chair Sand, to approve Planning Case #02-06 with revision to the Special Usc Pennit to restlict the hours of operation to 7:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. I The motion carried unanimously (7-0). CASE # 02-04 - SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE MODIFICATIONS Staff reviewed their report dated April 18, 2002 and asked for comments relative to the proposed subdivision Ordinance modifications. Chair Sand moved, seconded by Commissioner Ricke, to table Case #02-04 for additional information. The motion canied unanimously (7-0). REPORTS A. Planning Commissioners Chair Zimmemlan updated the Commission on the Joint Maintenance Facility Task Force. R. Staff I Mr. Parrish updated the Commission on upcoming issues coming before them in the next couple of months. C. Councilmember ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - MAY 1, 2002 11 I Councilmember Aplikowski stated Tom Moorc had been officially appointed to his new position. Councilmember Aplikowski stated the City was going on summer hours starting June 1, 2002. Councilmember Aplikowski summarized what tbe City Council approved at the last Council meeting, Councilmember Aplikowski invited the Commissioners to the Day in the Park on June 22, 2002, and invited them to ride in the parade if they were interested. SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS There wcre no comments made on the supplcmentary matelials. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Bezdicek moved, seconded by Commissioner Lembcrg to adjourn the meeting at 11 :03 p.m. The motion carried unanimously (7 -0). I I