Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-07-07 P & Z .' 1" CITY OF CENTERVILLE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JULY 7,1998 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Centerville held its regularly scheduled meeting and two public hearings on July 7, 1998, at City Hall, 1880 Main Street. PRESENT: Chairperson Kathy Welk Commission Members: Linda Broussard-Vickers AI LaMotte ABSENT: Commission Member John Buckbee STAFF/CONSULTANTS: run March, City Administrator Ry-Chel Gaustad, City Clerk David Nyberg, Consulting Engineer ****************************************************************************** PUBLIC HEARING (S) Lessard Rezone Request - Continued Mr. Willie Lessard (7005 20th Avenue) thanked the Commission for the opportunity to again bring this issue before the Commission. Mr. Lessard gave an overview of the proposed plat with consideration of the rezoning request. The Center Villa development is proposed to include eleven residential lots encompassing 4.6 acres and two commercial lots with two outlots, encompassing 6.95 acres. The largest single family lot is .51 acre and the average lot size is 2000 square feet. Furthermore, outlot A and outlot B is proposed to be 142,487 and 160,344 square feet, respectively. Mr. Michael Hunter (1917 Center Street) commented he is not in favor of the commercial development and would prefer the property remain wooded. Ms. Maria Hanggi (7033 Brain Drive) commented she would rather have Brian Drive not go through because of the traffic safety concerns. Mr. Paul Gordy (6936 Ivy Court) commented several residents signed a petition stating they are opposed to the zoning change. Chair Welk noted receipt of the petition which was signed by 39 residents (Exhibit A). Mr. Hunter noted Mr. Lessard is not a resident of the community and when the rezone is granted he may sell the land and move out of the city. 1 ., ,- Bridget Thoums (6947 Ivy Court) commented the commercial buildings and lighting will be an eye sore and irritant to the surrounding properties. Ms. Susan Luke (7026 Brian Court) said she and her family would not have purchased their home had they knew commercial business would be built in their back yard. Ms. Chris Swenson (7016 Brian Court) stated the residential Property surrounds the proposed commercial district and the residents concerns should be taken into consideration. In addition, she is opposed to the rezoning request. Ms. Dana Johnson (7017 Brian Drive) felt it not an appropriate place for commercial. Mr. Gordy commented there are no guarantees as to what will go in the area if it is zoned commercial. Mr. Ron Lenz (7008 Brian Drive) voiced concern about the commercial lights, noise and traffic. Mr. Ronald Kline (6995 Eagle Trail) the residents have no guarantees as to what kinds of business will be built in the area. Mr. Hunter said he is opposed to the zoning change and noted Mr. Lessard may not be a man of his words. Chair Welk emphasized the hearing is open so that the city can listen to the citizens, and she stated the meeting will be held in order and comments will be accepted in a respectful manner. Mr. Matt Davonie (E.R. Rud & Son) explained the benefit of the rezone is to eliminate the possibility of high density housing. Mr. Davonie added, the commercial campus like setting will lend to the community more so than apartments, or other high density structures. Mr. Tim Pelican (1889 Center Street) commented crime has increased in White Bear Township since the movie theater was built. Mr. Pelican predicted the same will happen in Centerville if commercial businesses are built in the proposed lots. Mr. Larry Sailer (1925 Center Street) stressed the need to develop a holding pond to address the drainage problems south of the proposed plat. Ms. Broussard-Vickers questioned the engineers if the drainage concerns have been addressed. Mr. Davonie noted the ponding should help the drainage in the area. Mr. Gordy stated ponding may become a safety hazard for the children. Mr. Kline questioned Mr. Lessard as to the commercial set back requirements. Mr. Lessard said 2 " . I ., there is a 30' set back requirement. Mr. Kline commented commercial buildings could be less than 100' feet from residential property lines. Ms. Swensen commented her and her husband will have a problem selling their house if commercial buildings are built near their back yard. Mr. David Bellingsley (6923 Sumac Court) suggested the Commission consider commercial lighting needs, drainage concerns and the residents opposition prior to acting on the request. Mr. Bellingsley questioned the City Staff if the city commissioned a crime report between commercial and residential properties. Mr. Lessard proposed only to allow specific businesses uses for outlots A & B (Exhibit B). Travis Rezone Request (I'he Woods of Oeanvater Creek) Mr. Dick Travis (Developer) requested the Commission to consider rezoning the property at 7305 and 7353 20th Avenue north from RI Rural Residential to R5 Executive housing. The lots comply with the regulations and the development lends to the area. Mr. LaMotte questioned Mr. Travis if the DNR and RCWD approved their grading plan. Mr. Travis commented the development proposal is scheduled on the August RCWD agenda. Furthermore, the DNR wetlands will not be touched but the building site elevations have not yet been confirmed. Mr. Mike Harris (7296 Brian Drive) voiced a concern about the wetlands and water drainage. Mr. Travis commented the proposed lots are high and will drain into the pond. Mr. Eric Larson (1957 73rd Street) noted he is interested in the drainage on the east side of the property. Ms. Sue Shepard (1935-73rd Street) questioned the developer if they would be interested in selling the south east building lot to the abutting residents. Mr. Travis commented he would be interested in considering the issue. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES March 12, 1998 Planning and Zoning Minutes The Commission tabled the minutes. APPEARANCES Dick Travis - Sketch Plan for Moore Property Mr. Travis shared his plans to develop the Moore property. The proposed lot has ten single family lots and one 10-acre outlot. Mr. Nyberg commented the Travis family would like to build a house on the north lot. However, the Travis family will need to obtain two variances for a 3 " .. temporary cul-de-sac turn around and another for an emergency vehicle access to the north property. In addition, no certificate of occupancy (C. 0.) will be issued until utilities are available to the property. Mr. March commented the Travis family may build on the south property which is 150' off the paved road. Mr. LaMotte questioned Staff if the length of the cul-de-sac is in compliance with city code. Mr. Nyberg commented the road is too long and the Travis' will need to seek a variance approval for the length of the road. Also, the Travis family will seek preliminary plat and the required variance approval during the August 4, meeting. Mr. Nyberg noted Center Villa plans need to move along or the city will need to address the row of tree removal along the north property line. ACTION ITEMS Action on Lessard Rezone Request Ms. Broussard Vickers commented the rezoning issue is a difficult decision to make. Ms. Broussard Vickers added, she asked her selfwhat is the Commissions role; who does the Commission answer to. Moreover, she noted she could not let personal opinions influence the decision. Ms. Broussard Vickers touched upon the desire to observe and address the City's needs as a whole. Likewise, public opinion does not influence the planners decision and she observed the benefits to the city. During the June meeting, citizens voiced a concern about traffic safety concerns. However, the revised plan addresses the traffic concerns. Next, the row of trees on the north property line may be removed and high density housing could be constructed. Again, Mr. Lessard has made provisions for the proper drainage and his plan allows for a berm and additional trees to buffer the commercial property from the residential property. Thus, leaving the row of tress and eliminate high density housing. Ms. Broussard-Vickers commented the commercial business taxes will benefit the entire city. Another reason was the property was taxed as commercial for years, until recently when the zoning was changed to residential. Also, Mr. Lessard has submitted a list of permissible commercial uses, limiting the commercial entities to more desirable businesses next to a residential zone. Overall, to rezone the property from R3 to B 1 Commercial is good for the City as a whole. Chair Welk stated it appears the commercial venture abutted proposed lots in Clearwater Meadows, however, the lots sold. The city would like to pick and choose what goes where but the rezone is the best decision for the whole city. Ms. Broussard Vickers moved to recommend the Council approve the Lessard rezone request from R3 to B 1 for the following reasons: the tax benefit to the city" traffic is not a concer.Q, and this rezone request allows existirlg houses a larger distance from their houses to the builditlgs whereas, high density structures like apartments will not provide the distance luxwy. And water flowage in regards to the Center Street pro.perties will be addressed. the row of trees on the west property line and the proJ)Osed plan addressed the drainq,ge concerns. Furthermore., Ms. Broussard Vickers moved to recommend to the Council to rezone the prQperty with consideration of the above-mentioned items. And with consideration of all engineering items.. (pondin.g on the 4 ., .. south and north edges of the pro.vertY). Chair Welk seconded the motion. Broussard-Vickers aye, Welk aye.. LaMotte nay. Motion carried. Action on Travis Rezone Request Mr. LaMotte moved to recommend to the Council to ap'prove the Travis rezone request. Ms. Brossard-Vickers seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Action on Ordinance #44A - BuDding Construction Mr. March presented an amendment to ordinance #44 A - Building Construction to read: Light IndustriaJ/Industrial Districts All buildings erected on land within the light industrial and industrial zoning districts shall be constructed with the main wall component being masonry, concrete or structural iron. No building shall have pole barn type construction nor an exterior wall surface of sheet metal in excess of 25%of the surface area. Exterior wall surfaces shall be of non-combustible materials, the trim materials are excluded from this requirement. Contrasting architectural features must be included to highlight the exterior wall faces. This may include contrasting building materials and/or colors. The intent is to develop aesthetically pleasing buildings. The building design will be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission. Commercial Districts Buildings in the commercial zoning districts shall be constructed with the main wall component being wood frame, masonry, concrete or structural iron. No building shall have pole barn type construction. Contrasting architectural features must be included to highlight the exterior wall faces. This may include contrasting building materials and/or colors. The intent is to develop aesthetically pleasing buildings. The building design will be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission. Mr. March commented the main intent is the commercial assessed value difference and the buildings longevity. Chair Welk noted there is no problem requiring structurally sound buildings for a better appearance. The Commission's consensus is to proceed with the amended changes. Mr. LaMotte moved to recommend approval to amend ordinance #44A - Building Construction Chair Welk seconded the motion. LaMotte.. Welk aye.. Broussard Vickers abmained. Motion carried. DISCUSSION ITEMS Shoreland Ordinance Mr. Nyberg briefed the Commission on the need to adopt the shoreland ordinance to complete the City's comprehensive plan. The Metropolitan Council approved the City Comprehensive plan contingent upon the completion and acceptance of the surface water management plan (SWMP). 5 . . The shoreland ordinance is needed to complete the SWMP. The shoreland ordinance is designed to identify the particular distance a building construction can occur from the waterways. Currently, the DNR is requesting the city require a 300' setback for the waterways. Whereas, Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) is requesting the city implement a minimal10oo' setback from the waterways. Mr. March proposed to design the shoreland ordinance as less restrictive as possible and then make application for approval to the governmental agencies. The Commission requested a joint meeting with the City Council to discuss this issue. Housing Maintenance Standards. Uniform Housing Code Mr. March updated the Commission on the City's need to implement a housing maintenance standard code. The Uniform Housing Code restricts residence that are in poor condition and provides the City the ability to enforce higher housing maintenance standards. The code will allow the city to address deterioration of principle structures and substandard buildings. Mr. March also proposed for the Commissions consideration, a supplemental ordinance which enforces higher building standards but is less restrictive. Mr. Bill LaLonde (1687 Westview Street) commented the Uniform building code sets a standard which gives the city an opportunity to keep homes maintained at a higher standard. Therefore, assisting in an overall benefit to the City. Mr. March commented the current ordinance leaves room for interpretation, certain areas are too strict and then others areas are not included. Ms. Broussard-Vickers requested additional time to review the uniform housing code and additional supplements. The Commission elected to table the issue until the August 4, Planning Commission meeting. Amended Ordinance #S Dischat:l~ of Firearms The Commission elected to table amended ordinance #5 discharge offirearms. Amended Ordinance #4 Signs. Subd. 32.03-04 Political Signs Ms. Brossard-Vickers moved to approve an amendment to the current political sign as presented. Mr. LaMotte seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Ms. Brossard-Vickers moved to continue the Lessard rezone request public hearin,g to the July 22, 1998 Council meetit\g. Chair Welk seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. ADJOURNMENT Ms. Broussard. Vickers moved to acljoum the July 7, 1998 Planning and Zonms meeting. Chair Welk seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. The Planning and,,zoning meeting adjourned at 10:05 p.m. \' \ ,., ~~ 6 \". Ifi,I'\, .. " , , " "., " oJ<=.., . ~ l . -.' .. I . . ",,' " " Ry-Chel Gaustad, CMC City Clerk 7 " ': I I i :1 .- ~ ." c 4.." ... t'~.. ": . . '\ I - ---- PETITION REGUARDING THE REZONING OF PROPERTY THIS IS A PROPOSAL TO BE PRESENTED TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CENTERVlllE. BELOW IS A LIST OF RESIDENTS WHO ARE OPPOSED TO REZONING THE FOllOWING PROPERTY: R23-31-41-0003- THAT PRT OF THE E1/2 OF THE N1/2 OF THE N1/2 OF THE SE 1/4 FO SEC 23 TWP 31 RGE 22 R2331-22-41-0004- THE N330 FT OF THE E1/2 OF THE N1/2 OF THE N1/2 OF THE SE 1/4 OF SEC 23 TWP 31 N. lOCALLY KNOWN AS: lAKE AREA UTILITIES CONT INC. 6005 20th. AVE SOUTH \- -- NAME. ADDRESS SIGNATURE ~~~~ ~!;J"fflal/~f ~..#S-!lJ- l.Jife.t!P.ld+fl,mt 69'1'1 1)ltlJu.eJ. ~~ ~ ~ &~'\\I ?)C'~ b'~~ J:y'J e()v.r~ _ ~ _/ , (( "'l e:,t'~K"\~uJ.A ~ Co '~l7T-vy ~~i J,r1- $- Im~a, ~~ '.C VII2:lC~ sl. . · Af{l~-' 'l~" Ce,'-!-I!!..- _e:..I. ("'a~/t"", ",1/' _ 1C).s7 ~ Jj, fa lfe1:s Sf Jrno..c. C::L- 41~7 fl4/nde.. (1 '/~~~ 51: MiJ.IJd~f-~~~W \,,\. S-k r+. 1:..0 t:/lasit~y Cr IK50 ~~ U: · ~:~t:t~ /'dl ~ 5rr . for/!7 I\l,/ (b/.. t" . c >- . ~ . .~. 6 . . . ~)".': . eo r~ PETITION REGUARDING THE REZONING OF PROPERTY THIS IS A PROPOSAL TO BE PRESENTED TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CENTERVlllE. BELOW IS A LIST OF RESIDENTS WHO ARE OPPOSED TO REZONING THE FOllOWING PROPERTY: R23-31-41-0003- THAT PRT OF THE E112 OF THE N1/2 OF THE N1/2 OF THE SE 1/4 FO SEC 23 TWP 31 RGE 22 R2331-22-41-0004- THE N330 FT OF THE E1/2 OF THE N1/2 OFTHE N1/2 OF THE SE 1/4 OF SEC 23 TWP 31 N. lOCALLY KNOWN AS: lAKE AREA UTILITIES CONT INC. 6005 20th. AVE SOUTH '. ~ ~~~ Q,bflE ~ ~ttl~ ~~r J;;;;jtjt#;w ';; ~^~~ ~ ~ ~~~fAV J.U~ 7~2' ~ri#N er: I'l1AL'< ~ce6 96'12 6e,/fJ~ ~~, ~1'.2 6fJ1/,J Dt. ~ ADDRESS - . tl~l-- 4 Chr \~ ~e~ -CO \ lo (?(\ 0>>-\ COU-1).1" 1Vi. U~ cy J(p'T'H~"-.l '7ol/t, 1'<(2.I::'AI Po.,J~ RMY ~ 'S~+tJ}1CA.t'f\ple I03'-L1r-iUl CoIA.~+ ~ 4l{rill1AtLftJf41!-~ 1()Z~ fr~aP'\ (t~-=- e~ j. Lfl~z" 7 oo? Ii",;<<'"'" D Y. 7p//f' /5~0/V '- ~ a.-'1?J -~~ . ~,*', .. .~ ..4 I- . . . '" '. r:I . . . . ~. . 7O::td ADDRESS ~ ~. :;a d gtf/ M,r . ' <-f7Uu.ieulkn~JrU r...-- . J Otr.PO Lm;;;~tidJ15Ji :O~&t~~ ~~~.U~.>~,~_ ;;7Arl7~'--'f. ~7 1 . ',lO.... !t . . . , ", . . '" ,; Center Villa Proposed Business Uses for Outlots A&B Financial Institutions; Bank Credit Union Personal & Professional Business Offices; Lawyer Real Estate Agency Consultants Counseling Print & Web Design, Multi Media Insurance Agency Art Studio Accounting (CPA) Financial Planner Engineering (p.E.) Investment Banker Commercial Schools; Day Care Vocational, Technical Health Club Hospitals & Clinics; Family Practitioner (MD) Dentist Nursing Home Chiropractor Outlot" A" 142,487sq. ft. Outlot "B" 160.344sQ. ft. Total" A" &"B"302,831sq.ft. Average Lot Size SO,472sq. ft. 3.27 acres (Maximum 3 Lots) 3.68 acres (Maximum 3 Lots) 6.95 acres (Maximum 6 Lots) 1.161lcres 7/3/98 TO: Centerville City Council FROM: Mike Carter & Family 6944 Ivy Ct. Centerville,MN.55038 RE: Lake Utilities Property (July 7th Hearing) Please register the fact that for a number of reasons I am opposed to the change of the above-mentioned property to Commercial. My property butts up to the south/west comer of the Lake Utilities Property. I bought my house and land 10 years ago with the intent of raising my family here. At that time a small neighborhood, the Tree Farm and the Lake Utilities property surrounded my property. I now have two daughters' ages 2 ~ and 6 months. I have watched a lot of development in those ten years and most of it has been planned quite well and in fact I have gained some great neighbors in that time. I believe that the reason Centerville has been so successful at drawing families to the area is because of the small town feel the area has been able to maintain over the years. Building residential all around this property and then putting a commercial development in the back yards of the people you have attracted just doesn't make any sense for the pe~!e or the city. I live in Centerville because I choose to. I make the drive to Eden Prairie .alwork each day only because I like where I live. If this area is zoned commercial I am sure that my property value and the property value of my neighbors will decrease. I won't be sticking around to see that happen. - -Y( ~(J c. t.J2.. Mike Carter, Jill, Ellie and Gina - -:", .. "' ': ~ -' fl' (LlJ6t-~~- From: Mr. & Mrs. Johnson 7017 Brian Drive Centerville, MN 55038 MAY 2 , I. To: City ofCenterville Planning and Zoning Commission 1880 Main Street Centerville, MN 55038 RE: PROPOSED REZONING OF R23-31-22-41-0003- THAT PRT OF THE E1/2 OF THE N1/2 FO THE N1/2 OF THE SE 1/4 FO SEC 23 TWP 31N. --R2-3-3-1-22--41 0004- THE N 330 FT OF THE El/2 OF THE N1/2 OF THE SE 1/4 OF SEC 23TWP31N. The rezoning of this property from R2 to B 1 would be inappropriate and irresponsible. The job of the City Planning and Zoning Commission is to maintain the integrity of the City and its residents by making decisions that will benefit the City and it's residents. The reason that this property is currently zoned R2 is because 100's of families and thousands of children surround this property. The people that currently built houses in this neighborhood and long standing tax payers of this city moved here to get away from bright lights and commercial sites typical of the inner city. There are many more appropriate settings in the City ofCenterville for commercial property. Make the..risbt..decision and vote against this proposal. We are prepared to use any legal means as necessary to stop this proposed rezoning. Lets not make a mountain out of a molehill and stop this proposal swiftly. Sincerely, .\ .Y . MttY 1 9 1998 LtLll CVucL /.L.,tiLitilIJ )u~ Concerning the proposed zoning change for property just south of 7008 Brian dr., please don't ! I feel very strongly about living next to any commercial enterprise. My wife and I left the city of S1. Paul a year and one half ago for some peace and quiet, after retiring from the Fire Department. So again, PLEASE RETAIN THE PRESENT RESIDENTIAL ZONING. Respectfully, Ronald and Mary Ann Lenz 7008 Brian DR. Centerville (MLJ. -fI ~7~47 l . ,. ,- . .. )t,Lpu.- yjaJu ~ tLLLliJUj . . . May 25,1998 City of Centerville 1880 Main St. Centerville, Mn. 55038 City of Centerville Planning and Zoning Commission, This letter is in responsetQ the_rezoning ofR23-31-41-003 & R23-31-22-41-0004 etc or locally known as Lake Area Utilities Cont. Inc. My husband and myself are urging the Zoning Commission to keep the above said property as residential. We live in a new home that borders this property. We have only lived here for the past six months. We chose this property for the obvious reasons, which do not include commercial property right next door. We called the city before purchasing this lot and were told there were no plans for that particular property. Now we come to find out that you want to put commercial property right next door to my new home!!!! That is ridicules!!!!! We expected that at some point there would be another home built next to ours, although we were hoping for a park or refuse for the wild life. Had we known your intentions we would have chose to build elsewhere. We have spent a lot of time and money on our new home. We do not intend to have the value of our new home depreciate and that is what will happen. Our family moved here from the city to have peace and quiet not a business next door. Then there is the issue of safety and security in our neighborhood. The street we live on is a dead end. We have many small children and we are very concerned about the increased traffic. Also this piece of land is home to many of the wildlife in the area. We look out the window and see deer in our backyard and ducks swimming in the pond. Maybe we should think of preserving some of this. We will fight to keep this from becoming a reality. Our home and our new way of life are at stake. We will attend your meeting on June 2nd to show our support to veto this outrageous proposal. Sincerely, ~~~. Georgine & Robert Kurschner 7005 Brian Dr. Centerville, MN. 55038 . ..