Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC 04-02-2003 . MINUTES CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION . WEDNESDAY, APRIL 2, 2003 7:00 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER Chair Sand called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. ROLL CALL Present were Commissioners Ken Bezdieek, Clayton Larson, Elizabeth Modesette, Megan Ricke, Clayton Zimmerman, and Chair David Sand. Absent: Cathy Smithknecht. Also present were Mayor Beverly Aplikowski, Council Members Gregg Larson, Lois Rem, and Brenda Holden, Director of Community Services Aaron Parrish, City Planner Peter Hellegers, and Recording Secretary Kathleen Altman. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 5, 2003. . Commissioner Modesette requested the following changes: Correction to Commissioner Zimmerman's corrections on the January 8, 2003 meeting, should read: "...pork chop there would prevent left turns." (Subsequently staff has revised Commissioner Zimmerman's correction to read: "Commissioner Modesette asked if it was possible to put some kind of a pork chop there to make i! imnossible to make a left turn.") Commissioner Zimmerman moved, seconded by Commissioner Ricke to approve the March 5, 2002 minutes as amended. The motion carried unanimously (6-0). PUBLIC HEARINGS A. PLANNING CASE #03-08 - RAMSEY COUNTY/PARTNERS PUBLIC WORKDS FACILITY, HAMLINE A VENUE AND HIGHWAY 96, SPECIAL USE PERMIT Mr. Hellegers stated applicants were requesting a Special Use Permit to allow for a Public Works Facility. Mr. Hellegers reviewed their report dated March 26, 2003 and recommended approval of the Site Plan Review subject to conditions as outlined in their report. Mr. Hellegers noted this public healing had been properly noticed. Chair Sand opened the public hearing at 7:14 p.m. Chair Sand invited applicant to make comment. . Julio Mangine, Director of Property Management for Ramsey County; Ken Heidcr, Director of Public Works; Bruce Thompson; Assistant Director of Property Management; ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - APRIL 2, 2003 2 . Fred Moore, Civil Engineer SRF Consulting; and Greg Fenton, BWBR Architects were in attendance on behalf of applicant. Mr. Fenton summarized the Site Plan, floor plan, and landscaping for the Commission. Chair Sand asked about the oil drop off site and what would that look like. Mr. Fenton replied the type of disposal facilities had not been fully explored, but there would be screening in the proposed area. Ken Heider replied there would be a pedestal that residents could pour their used oil in. There would also be a small bucket that people could put oil filters. He noted there was a demand for oil disposal at their other facility and it was one of the items that they wanted the Commission's comments on. He noted this would have drawbacks. Chair Sand stated this was the last thing he wanted to see in that area. He stated where they were proposing this was not an appropriate place for it. Mr. Heider noted if this were not visible, it would not be used. He indicated if it were also not convenient, it would not be used. Commissioner Zimmerman stated they put in a sign indicating where the location for the drop off site was located. Mr. Fenton stated the area would be well screened and they had previous experiences where if the area was not policed, other things showed up in that area. . Chair Sand stated he was not convinced that they needed that type of a facility. He stated he would like to see this set up like a garage area, and not leave things sit outside. He suggested they have some type of an indoor facility that was aesthetically pleasing. Mr. Heider noted this was not a household hazardous waste facility; it would only be used for used engine oil and not for other chemical or waste products. Chair Sand asked if the residents would be able to distinguish this feature. Mr. Heider replied that was one of the issues. Commissioner Zimmerman noted because this was a maintenance facility, he expected the County would have waste oil from their trucks. He suggested that there be a mechanism that residents were able to deposit their waste oil in with the County's waste oil. He noted this would eliminate people from dropping off other things for recycling. Commissioner Zimmerman stated he would like to see an elevation plan. He asked what was the facility going to look like at ground level. He asked what was the height of the berming and how much of the structure would be visible from Highway 96. Mr. Fenton summarized for the Commission what the building would look like from ground level. Commissioner Zimmerman asked for an explanation how the 48-foot was arrived at for the salt/sand structure. Mr. Fenton replied the goal was to have at least Y, the width of . the building to have a 30 feet clearance so the trucks would dump on one lift, which would make the structure 48- feet. He noted this design was the shortest of the designs they had looked at. He noted the structure would be open on the east and south sides. He indicated this structure was a standard for MnDOT. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - APRIL 2, 2003 3 . Commissioner Zimmerman asked if this structure was secure enough from the elements that they would be able to store what was left over until the following season. Mr. Heider replied it would and that was one of the intentions of the building. He noted they bought their salt through the State bidding process. He noted the County would save a lot of money with a structure such as this. Ms. Modesette asked what was the life cycle for these types of structures. Mr. Fenton noted the guaranteed life was I5 years and the estimated life was 20 years. Chair Sand asked what was the material they were using for the roof. Mr. Fenton replied it was a vinyl with a woven mesh embedded in it. He noted it would not feel like fabric, but like plastic. Commissioner Ricke asked what was the plan for the fence along the east side of the property. Mr. Fenton replied it would be a coated chain link fence, dark green in color. Chair Sand noted on the west side there was substantially less attention to landscaping. He asked if funding did not come through and the Guard facility was not constructed, would this building be short oflandscaping. He asked if they could still landscape there, even if a building went in. Mr. Fenton replied they did not have any plantings planned for that area right now because there was drainage there. He noted the elevation of the ground continued to rise in that area. He stated there was the possibility of putting landscaping in that area, but he believed the National Guard was planning on expanding. . Mr. Moore stated the National Guard would have a lot of green space on their property for security reasons. He noted there was a "mountain" of dirt there right now, but that would be removed if/when the Guard expanded. Commissioner Larson asked about the canopy on the east end of the building. He asked ifit was open on all three sides and what was it used for. Mr. Fenton replied there was an open-air canopy planned for that area and it was open on three sides. Jeanne Winiecki, 447I Old Highway 10, asked if they would be screening the parking lot. She asked if there was a berm along Highway 96, or if the screening was entirely dependant upon prairie grass. She stated she was disappointed to think that the City would change the way they do business and expect different screening and landscaping on this project. Mr. Moore replied there was proposed to be a berm all along Highway 96, which would be six-foot high and screen the vehicles in the parking lot. He noted they would only see the tops of the vehicles in the parking lot. The purpose of the berm was to hide most of the vehicles. He noted they would be looking at the top part of the buildings only. There were no further comments made for or against the Site Plan Review. Chair Sand closed the public hearing at 8:02 p.m. . Commissioner Larson asked about protection of fuel islands. Mr. Moore replied the pond that was on the site was a water quality treatment pond. He noted there was a complete storm sewer system to collect water from all of the hard surfaces on the site, including the salt/sand storage area. He noted that system would then go into the water quality ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - APRIL 2, 2003 4 . treatment pond. He stated the purpose of the sand/salt building was to have it covered to prevent run off as much as possible. Commissioner Larson asked how would the water get treated. Mr. Moore replied the water would be very dilute. He stated the treatment pond would also treat the roadway run off. Chair Sand asked what were the typical hours of operation with respect to trucks coming in and out of the site and what type of lighting would the site have. Mr. Heider replied from the operational standpoint, the normal working hours for maintenance was 7:00 a.m. - 3:30 p.m. Office hours were 8:00 - 4:30. He noted if there were snow events, or emergency situations, they could be working almost any hour. He indicated in the winter they had a night crew of 5 or 6 people who typically worked around the building on maintenance, so they typically would not make much noise. He stated they had tried to design the site and the circulation on the site to minimize backing up of vehicles. He noted the back up alarms would be from loading trucks, but because of the way they set the site circulation up, the trucks themselves, which was most of the traffic, would not need to back up that often. He noted they wanted the trucks going forward as much as possible. Mr. Fenton replied with respect to lighting, they were designing the lighting in compliance with the City Code and Ordinances. . Mr. Sand asked what type of color the lighting would be. Mr. Fenton replied it would be more of the typical white lighting, which would be perimeter cased and pointed downward. Chair Sand asked if the reason why they chose the white light over the high-pressure sodium. Mr. Fenton replied it was for the efficiency of the lamp. Mr. Mangine stated the National Guard did not light the parking lot for security and the only time they came on was as motion detectors. Chair Sand asked if they had thought of that option. Mr. Mangine replied they had thought of this as an energy saving measure, as well as from a safety standpoint. He stated the lighting that was proposed was programmable, but he indicated he would like to look at using motion detectors instead if there was no objection from the Commission. He stated he thought the City was requiring the parking lot to be lit at all times, but if the City wanted them to look at this option, they would be willing to do that. Commissioner Modesette noted she was in favor ofthis type oflighting. Commissioner Modesette stated she was sympathetic to the aesthetic comer regarding the oil waste site, but she also believed that since this was a public facility and given the . environmental concerns for other improper disposal that an easily accessible place for oil disposal should be provided. She asked if the National Guard facility were to move north, would a green alley be incorporated into this plan along the east as a contingency. - ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - APRIL 2, 2003 5 . Mr. Mangine replied the idea of sharing fueling; road access, and security would all work. He noted they would work on a contingency plan if things changed with the National Guard building. Commissioner Bezdicek recommended they relied on the present durnpsite for oil and forego this proposal. Commissioner Ricke asked about the proposed traffic flow in and out of the facility. She asked where the large trucks would be located. Mr. Heider replied everyone would have to exit at Hamline. Highway 96 and Hamline were County Roads and both roads would be used to some degree. He noted Highway 96 was a very good east/west connection for them and indicated the vast amount of traffic would probably be going to the east on Highway 96. He stated there was less County work south on Hamline. He indicated Highway 96 would be used the majority of the time. He noted if there was a problem with traffic, they could address this in the future and they were sensitive to traffic concems. Chair Sand asked what was the overall plan in terms of starting construction. Mr. Heider replied the actual construction would start later this summer with plans of occupation of the building in fall, 2004. If the building were not ready by fall, 2004, they would wait until spring, 2005 to move in. Chair Sand asked how would the reconstruction of Highway 96 affect this project. Mr. . Heider replied it probably would not affect this project that much. He noted Highway 96 would be reconstructed under traffic and they would work with that issue. Chair Sand expressed concern that there would be additional traffic on Hamline as they reconstructed Highway 96. Mr. Heider replied he did not think this would be an issue. Commissioner Zimmerman moved, seconded by Commissioner Larson to approve Planning Case #03-08, Ramsey County/Partners Public Works Facility, Hamline Avenue and Highway 96, Special Use Permit subject to the following conditions and recommendations: 1. All necessary building permits shall be filed with the City Building Official. 2. All necessary sign age permits shall be filed with the City Planner. 3. The number of handicapped accessible parking spaces shall comply with the State Building Code requirements. 4. The applicant shall submit a landscape performance bond or other surety for 125% of the cost of materials and installation valid one full year from the date of installation. 5. Detailed final grading, utility, drainage, and erosion control plans shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval. 6. Compliance with the applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. 7. Any applicable permits shall be filed with Ramsey County, the Rice Creek . Watershed District, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, and other regulatory agencies. 8. That the building material variance as outlined in Item No. 13 meet the approval of the City Engineer and Building Inspector. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMM:ISSION - APRIL 2, 2003 6 9. That the oil and sand location on the site plan be deleted and the waste oil drop . off be incorporated into the existing County waste oil storage on the site and the County come up with an acceptable method to convey that waste oil into their container. If that is deemed unworkable the County come back to the City to amend their site plan. IO. That the landscape plan include landscaping to the west side of the building not knowing when the National Guard will build their facility. Commissioner Larson asked if it was proper that they do not approve the waste oil maintenance facility and instead have them come back with a plan at a later date for review by the Commission. Chair Sand replied that would require an amendment to the motion. Commissioner Zimmerman noted the reason he included it was because there was a location shown on the site plan that they did not feel was an appropriate place, so he wanted residents to be able to drop off oil at the same place that the County placed their oil. He indicated they could discuss not having waste oil on the property. Commissioner Larson stated he was fine with the motion as it stood. Chair Sand asked if the motion as presented was agreeable to the County. Mr. Heider replied the condition would require residents to hand the waste to an employee who would carry the waste into the building for disposal. He noted from a safety issue, it would be difficult to have people behind the building dropping off their oil. . Commissioner Bezdicek asked if this would preclude residents dropping off the oil outside of business hours. Mr. Heider replied that was correct. The oil would need to be dropped off during business hours. Commissioner Ricke suggested either the disposal had to be a part of their own disposal or they needed to present an aItemative plan that was approved by the Commission. Mr. Parrish replied the County could determine fyom their operations if there was a need for this type of a facility, they could amend their site plan at a future date. Chair Sand noted their intention was to not allow the drop off facility at the front, but rather to provide an alternative site on the property. The motion carried unanimously (6-0). B. PLANNING CASE 03-09 : BRUCE GODE. 3538 GLEN ARDEN ROAD, VARIANCE Chair Sand opened the public hearing at 7:35 p.m. Mr. Hellegers stated applicants were requesting a 6-foot variance from the minimum side yard setback for one side. This variance would allow construction of an attached 24x26 . garage four feet from the northern property line. :Mr. Hellegers reviewed their report dated March 27, 2003 and recommended denial of the Site Plan Review for the reasons as outlined in their report. Mr. Hellegers noted this public hearing had been properly noticed. .- ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - APRIL 2, 2003 7 Chair Sand invited anyone for or against this to come before the Commission. . Pauline Richards, 3544 Glen Arden Road, stated the property line between their property and the Gode property was in question and they felt that if anything happened, an official survey needed to take place. She noted if the property line to the north and south of their property was where their neighbors said they were, they did not have the 80 feet their title said they had. She noted there was only 14 feet between the edge of their garage and the edge of the house to the north of them. She stated if they bad a variance on their south, this would squeeze their property. She stated she understood applicant's desire to have a double car garage because they would also like to have a double car garage, but after they had looked at their options, they realize that it was not possible for them to have a double car garage. She noted she was against this variance. Commission Bezdicek asked if she had discussed their concems with applicant. Ms. Richard replied they had not; she did not know about this request until she received notice from the City. Bruce Gode, 3538 Glen Arden Road, applicant, noted the stakes located last year was one for the property line and one for the setback. He indicated the telephone poles were a good judge as to where the property lines were located. Chair Sand asked if they had considered a different layout for the garage, which would make it flush with the home and come into the garage from the side. Mr. Gode replied . that take up the whole back of his home to do it that way. He noted he had a large truck, which would make it a very difficult turn there. He stated he could tilt the garage at an angle, but then his lights would be shining in the neighbor's house. Chair Sand stated Mr. Gode needed to decide what was more important to him - a double car garage that would need to be moved, or live with a single car garage. Commissioner Zimmerman asked if they built their addition, would they need to take down their existing garage. Mr. Gode replied the garage did not have to be demolished to add on this addition. Commissioner Zimmerman noted he could build a two car deep garage. Mr. Gode replied he had thought about that, but he did not see that as a viable option. Chair Sand asked ifhe had spoken with an architect about this. Mr. Gode replied he had hired an architect and it was the architect who had pointed out the setback requirement. Ms. Richards stated she realized that this property line had never come into question before, but she was uncomfortable having any action taken without an official survey of the property. Chair Sand asked staff what they knew about the statement that the telephone poles were . the property marker. Mr. Parrish replied he did not know what the situation was in this particular neighborhood, but telephone poles tended to be located on the property lines. However, that was not always the case. He noted they should not rely on that and the only official way to determine where the property line was located would be to obtain a survey. --------- ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - APRIL 2, 2003 8 . Commissioner Modesette stated her property had a telephone pole right in the middle of it. Mr. Gode noted every lot on Glen Arden Road was 80 feet by 200 feet and the poles were spaced 80 feet apart. Chair Sand noted Ms. Richards was concerned that they did not have 80 feet on their property. There were no further comments made for or against the Site Plan Review. Chair Sand closed the public hearing at 8:5 I p.m. Commissioner Larson asked staff if a building permit application were approved and issued, would the property line have to be established and located in order to get it in the right location. Mr. Parrish responded it all depended on the circumstances. Re noted if the resident found the stake and could measure it, they would not require a survey. He stated if there was a question about the property line, the building inspector could verify the line or they could require a survey. Commissioner Larson asked what was the front setback. Mr. Hellegers replied the front setback was 40 feet. Commissioner Larson asked if they had room to the front for this garage. Mr. Hellegers . replied they probably could not put anything much further forward than proposed. Commissioner Larson moved, seconded by Commissioner Ricke to deny Planning Case #03-09, Bruce Gode, 3538 Glen Arden Road, Variance for the following reason: . The state Statute definition of "undue hardship" is not met. In Chapter 462.357, Subdivision 6, (2), defines "undue hardship" as a situation where: "... the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls.. .". However, in this particular instance the official controls would allow the applicant a reasonable use; construct a two-car garage somewhere behind the house or continue to have an attached one-car garage. Also, as stated in staff s report, the property could be put to a reasonable use without the granting of a variance and therefore, does not demonstrate that there is an undue hardship. The motion carned unanimously (6-0). UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS A. COUNTY E-2 AND CLEVELAND A VENUE MORATORIUM. . Mr. Rellegers stated the City Council approved a moratorium on certain parcels in the vicinity of County Road E-2 and Cleveland Avenue on February IO, 2003. These parcels were currently zoned R-2. The current situation could result in development, which is inconsistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. As a result of the moratorium, the Planning Commission needed to review the affected area to determine whether the ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - APRIL 2, 2003 9 . properties in the moratorium area should be zoned NB and whether the Comprehensive Plan needs to be amended to incorporate any recommended changes. Chair Sand asked if the parcel west of the drainage ditch was zoned Neighborhood Business. Mr. Hellegers replied that was correct. Chair Sand noted if they went the rezoning route, the lots would be least affected. Mr. Hellegers replied there would be some impact on all of the lots, but in terms of keeping it consistent, staff was recommending the residential area be R-2 and the remaining area be NB, which would make it more consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Modesette asked if the size of the lot on the west side of the drainage area would be sufficient for development. Mr. Hellegers replied staff was attempting to keep this consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Modesette suggested coming off the north side of the island and straightened that line up to the lots that were not in the moratorium. Mr. Hellegers replied that was a possibility. Commissioner Zimmerman asked what was the ownership status on the lots divided by the drainage easement and those lots south of the drainage easement. Mr. Hellegers replied that certain lots on the west and south sides of the drainage easement had not subdivided to become separate lots, these lots were still considered part of the lots . fronting on New Brighton Road. Commissioner Zimmerman stated even if they did indicate that the lots were NB, the owners would need to subdivide their lot and sell it to a developer. Commissioner Modesette noted there would be five residents that would need to subdivide their property. Commissioner Zimmerman noted this area might never be a neighborhood business district because the residents might not sell their property. Mr. Parrish noted if they rezoned to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and added the small lots on east side of the ditch, they were not creating developable lots. Commissioner Zimmerman asked if by adding portions of the lots to the south of drainage ditch, was it necessary to have that portion of the property designed NB in order to make that whole piece of property developable, or could it be developed as it currently existed on the zoning map. Mr. Parrish replied it depended on what they wanted to see there in the future - either a neighborhood businesses or a residential area. Chair Sand stated if developers thought that the only suitable land available for development was north of the ditch, why were they talking about rezoning the area to the south. He asked why did they not deal only with the "island" and leave the area to the south as R-2. Mr. Hellegers noted the reason the Planning Commission was reviewing . this issue was that if the area south of the drainage ditch remained zoned as R-2 it would not be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Ricke asked why this area was designated the way it was on the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Parrish stated the type of interest they saw on those lots was ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - APRIL 2, 2003 10 . from Bethel College and mini-storage facilities. He noted given the location of the property and some of development constraints, it would need to be commercial or higher density residential. Commissioner Zimmerman stated the way the property was laid out in the Zoning Map was sufficient and did not need to be changed. He noted if a developer wanted to change the zoning, it would be up to them to come in for a rezoning request. He believed the Future Land Use map should be changed to match the Zoning Map. Mr. Hellegers noted there was also large electric transmission lines along Cleveland Avenue and any development would need to be outside the easement area, approximately 100 feet back from the street. He also noted staff had received requests from various developers for businesses, as well as interest in constructing a single-family home. Commissioner Ricke suggested leaving it up to the public hearing and the residents to direct the Commission. Commissioner Zimmerman noted if there was not a need to change it at this time, why change it. Mr. Parrish noted the purpose of the Future Land Use Plan was for the future planning and the City needed to determine what they wanted to see there in 20 years and not rely solely on resident input to make that decision. Commissioner Ricke pointed out that the City did not know the reason the . Comprehensive Plan was laid out the way it was. Commissioner Zimmerman noted he did not see the reason they needed to rezone this, there appeared to be no need to do so and he did not want to split up residential property. Commissioner Larson noted he supported the staffs recommendation because of its proximity to the freeway. He stated he would like to see the area rezoned and this was a good area for a neighborhood business. Commissioner Modesette stated she agreed with Commissioner Larson and expressed concem about creating an island between residential and neighborhood business. She pointed out the three southern lots were already separated lots from the residential side. Commissioner Bezdicek asked which lot had recently been separated. Mr. Hellegers replied it was the second lot from the south. Commissioner Ricke asked if it would be difficult to show the R-2 coming off of the Southwest corner as suggested by Commissioner Modesette. Mr. Hellegers noted that area would need to rezoned to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Chair Sand noted they would need to prepare a survey to go along with the topography. . Commissioner Zimmerman moved, seconded by Commissioner Larson to recommend that the Commission supports the current Zoning as it exists and change the Comprehensive Plan Map (Future Land Use) to match the Zoning Map. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - APRIL 2, 2003 II Commissioner Bezdicek noted this area was more conducive to neighborhood business . rather than residential development. Chair Sand reminded Commissioner Modesette that she would need to abstain from voting due to her owning property in this area. The motion carried (3-2-l). (Chair Sand, Commissioners Zimmerman and Larson - Aye. Commissioners Ricke and Bezdicek - Nay. Commissioner Modesette - abstain). REPORTS A. Planning Commissioners None. B. Staff None. C. Council Member Council Member Larson updated the Commission on recent City Council actions. . ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Ricke moved, seconded by Commissioner Zimmerman to adjoum the meeting at 9:45 p.m. The motion carried unanimously (6-0). .