Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-03-06 P & Z CITY OF CENTERVILLE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MARCH 6, 2001 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Planning and Zoning Commission held their regularly scheduled meeting on March 6, 2001, at 6:30 p. m. PRESENT: Chair Person Brian Hanson Commissioner David Kilian Commissioner John McLean Commissioner Ray DeVine Commissioner Barry Brainard ABSENT: Commissioner Rob Sheppard COUNCIL: , LiaisonLinda Broussard Vickers STAFF: City Administrator, Jim March I. CALL TO ORDER The Chair called the meeting to order at 6:36 p.m. II. PUBLIC HEARING(S) None. III. APPEARANCES None. IV. OLD BUSINESS None. V. NEW BUSINESS 1. Mini-Storage Mr. March gave a status report on mini-storage facilities to date. Mr. March stated that he had spoken with Mr. Hoeft regarding same and he recommended that the City consider allowing mini-storage facilities as a permitted use in the Industrial Park with the requirement that a Special Use Permit be obtained. A Special Use Permit would allow the City to control the parameters of use. Mr. March stated that the developer was anticipating on constructing a wooden framed building and that currently, “pole barn” type buildings are not allowed in the Industrial Park. Page 1 of 8 March 3, 2001 Planning and Zoning Minutes Mr. March submitted a draft amendment to Ordinance #4 that encompasses mini-storage facilities. Commissioner Kilian questioned whether the City could use the Special Use Permit to limit the number of mini-storage facilities. Mr. March suggested that language regarding footage requirements between the facilities rather than the Special Use Permit. Commissioner Brainard questioned whether the Commission would be reviewing and approving the Special Use Permit this evening. Mr. March stated there would need to be a public hearing prior to approval of same. Mr. March also stated that the developer would need to agree with the requirements set by the City prior to proceeding. Mr. Sadelack requested that the Commission review the requirements that they intend on imposing for mini-storage facilities. Mr. Sadelack specifically questioned whether the City would require the installation of a sprinkler system. Commissioner Brainard stated that sprinkler system requirements are governed by the State Fire Code and the City cannot deviate from them. Mr. Sadelack stated that a sprinkler system would add additional cost to the project and he desired to find a way around that requirement. Mr. March stated that the cities of Circle Pines and Lino Lakes have adopted the more restrictive fire code, as well as Centerville. Mr. March stated that the City could not grant a Variance in regards to the State Fire Code requirements. Mr. Sadelack stated that he would research how other facilities in neighboring communities got around this requirement. Commissioner Brainard stated that Mr. Sadelack needed to consider the location, date of construction, and City or State requirements at the time of construction and presently, when researching other facilities. Commissioner Brainard also stated that fairly recently cities have adopted the more restrictive fire code. Mr. Sadelack stated that one (1) facility in the City of Blaine does not have a sprinkler system, but rather firewalls. Mr. Sadelack stated that if required to install a sprinkler system in each building it may be cost prohibitive to construct same. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers explained that each City adopts a State Fire Code; some are more restrictive than others. The City of Centerville chose to adopt the more restrictive version of same and if Mr. Sadelack desired to construct a facility within the City, he needed to follow the City of Centerville’s requirements and it did not matter what has happened in other cities. Commissioner Brainard stated that Mr. Sadelack’s architect should contact Fire Chief, Bennett to ascertain the fire code requirements. Commissioner Hanson stated that the consensus reached at the workshop was that mortar pillars with wrought iron fencing in between each, one (1) access in and out with a secondary egress outlet, secured access code gate, security cameras for the office and exterior areas, and an on-site manager during regular business hours were to be required for mini-storage facilities. Mr. Sadelack stated that the “beauty” of the project, not incurring expenses associated with hiring employees to watch the facility. Commissioner Brainard stated that the requirements would provide a more appealing facility and ensure security with an on-site Page 2 of 8 March 3, 2001 Planning and Zoning Minutes manager. Mr. Sadelack stated that he may be able to be at the facility regularly or could hire someone, but anticipated this to be a low maintenance business. Mr. Sadelack stated that in his opinion, he is not selling something and does not feel the need to have an on site manager. Mr. Sadelack stated he was unaware of another mini-storage facility other than those with on-site caretakers and franchised mini-storage facilities that have an on- site manager during business hours. He then noted he did not see the necessity for same. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers questioned the type of construction requirements the Commission would place on mini-storage facilities. Consensus was that the construction would conform to the Industrial requirements for the business park. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers stated that the City can not modify the requirements for individual businesses. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers also stated the City recently modified the requirements for buildings in the Industrial Park when re-writing Ordinance #4 and took into consideration that it would increase the cost of construction, but the City desired to require a specific type of structure. Council Member Broussard Vickers questioned whether the City could require an on-site manager. Commissioner Kilian did not believe there was a necessity to provide same. Commissioner Brainard stated that there has been problems with vandalism and maintenance at other facilities and an on-site manage would deter vandalism and ensure that the facility is maintained accordingly. Commissioner DeVine questioned the type of fencing proposed by developer. Mr. Sadelack stated that fencing is undetermined and understands the aesthetic concerns expressed by the Commission. Mr. Sadelack stated that the requirements the Commission outlined are ultimately advantageous to him as it will force him to provide a better facility and people will use the facility due to the enhanced safety features. Mr. Sadelack also stated that while the requirements may be advantageous they are also a hindrance due to additional costs not taken into consideration. Mr. Sadelack also stated that he was not planning on installing a sprinkler system or concrete construction requirements that the Commission is requiring. Commissioner DeVine stated that the valuation of the building must conform to the average valuation per square foot of the surrounding buildings in the Industrial Park. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers stated that if the Commission adheres to the construction standard, there would be consistency. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers also stated that Mr. Sadelack would need to meet the industrial building standards due to the fact that he does not meet the standards for obtaining a Variance; and cost is not a reason for granting a Variance. Council Member Broussard Vickers suggested that the architect sketch plans that take into account current ordinances and Mr. Sadelack could determine cost effectiveness. Commissioner McLean questioned whether the architect had reviewed the industrial building code requirements. Mr. Sadelack stated that he was unsure of same. Mr. March stated that Mr. Sadelack had been presented with an entire copy of Ordinance #4. Page 3 of 8 March 3, 2001 Planning and Zoning Minutes Mr. March stated that there was a possibility that the City could allow mini-storage in a Commercial Zoning District rather than in the Industrial Park; however, Mr. Hoeft recommended allowing mini-storage as a Special Use in the Industrial Park. Mr. Sager felt that construction of the facility complying with the industrial requirements was financially unobtainable. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers questioned the allowable Commercial Uses and Mr. March reviewed same. Commissioner Brainard stated that he was uncomfortable with allowing mini-storage facilities to be constructed on Commercial property. Commissioner DeVine questioned the tax valuation of the proposed facility and Mr. Sadelack stated approximately $600,000 to $800,000 excluding land. Mr. Sager estimated the value to be approximately $1 million including land and the four (4) proposed buildings. Mr. Sadelack stated that the value would be higher if a sprinkler system was required. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers calculated the value of the building to be approximately $20 per square foot. Commissioner Brainard stated there is a metropolitan standard of average costs that can be obtained from the League of Minnesota Cities but stated he believes $20 to be below that average. Commissioner Brainard that stated he believed pole barn construction was more prone to damage caused by vandalism than a concrete structure would be. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers stated fire is a major concern with pole barn construction. Commissioner Brainard stated the he desired to remain with concrete construction inside and out, and the use of heavy gauge garage doors. Commissioner Brainard felt that $20 per square foot was a very low valuation. Chairperson Hanson stated it was the consensus of the Commission at the workshop to require that mini-storage be allowed only in the Industrial Park and be required to be built to the construction requirements of same. Consensus was that industrial construction requirements would remain the same. Mr. March recommended that the developer consider starting with two (2) buildings instead of four (4), suggesting that may make construction of the facility feasible. Chairperson Hanson stated that the office area would need to meet City, State and Federal requirements. The Commission requested that the developer inform them whether they were going to proceed with construction of the facility considering the industrial requirements. It was determined that a public hearing process would not be entered into until such time. Page 4 of 8 March 3, 2001 Planning and Zoning Minutes Motion by Commissioner DeVine, seconded by Commissioner Kilian to recommend to Council that when Ordinance #4 is amended, an additional amendment be made to allow mini-storage facilities in the Industrial Park with and additional requirement that a Special Use Permit be obtained. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. March suggested the developer contact Goetz Landscaping & Irrigation to ascertain the contractor used for that building. Mr. March stated that using a contractor, who is already in town, may save the developer money. 2.Ordinance #39 – Signage Mr. March stated that if there were no additional modification to the Sign Ordinance, the Commission would a public hearing at their next meeting. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers questioned whether portable signs would be grandfathered in under the new ordinance. Consensus was to seek Mr. Hoeft’s opinion on this issue. Motion by Commissioner DeVine, seconded by Commissioner Kilian to accept the modifications to Ordinance #39, Signage as presented and call for a public hearing at its next regularly scheduled meeting. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously. 3.Eagle Pass Sketch Plan Mr. Mike Quigley, Gor-Em Development, presented a sketch plan for Eagle Pass Second nd (2) Addition. Mr. March stated that the two (2) organized town home associations do not desire to contain this development. Mr. March stated that Mr. Quigley has agreed to organize a separate association for same. Mr. March stated the City originally thought there would be twin homes built on this site; however, recent sales of single-family homes make this a better product. Council Member Broussard Vickers questioned whether the homeowners would be assessed construction of the roadway due to the placement in the rear of their homes. Mr. March stated that the organized town home associates do not desire to include additional roads as private roads that they would have to improve in the future. Mr. March noted there are new woodland preservation issues that would need to be considered as the development proceeds. Council Member Broussard Vickers suggested flipping the plan to take the road away from the back yard of the residents. Mr. Quigley stated he would look into that option before he came before the Commission again. Page 5 of 8 March 3, 2001 Planning and Zoning Minutes Mr. March stated that the proposal would be before the Commission for a public hearing at their April meeting. 4.Commission Member Training Mr. March stated the Commission Member suggested additional training and Staff contained same in their packet for review. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers stated that Staff was researching the possibility of providing training at City Hall. Commissioner Brainard suggested obtaining videos from the League of Minnesota Cities. Mr. March stated that the City is considering signing up the Commission Members for an APA membership that may be helpful in providing members with additional information. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers questioned whether any member was interested in attending the April 21, 2001 Beyond the Basics training in St. Paul. Commissioner Brainard stated he likes to receive the League of Minnesota Cities informational handouts. Commissioners DeVine, Kilian, Chair Hanson and Council Liaison Broussard Vickers stated they desired attending the April 21, 2001 training session and requested that Mr. March register them accordingly. Commissioner McLean requested that Mr. March obtain APA membership for all members. 5.Liaisons Commissioner DeVine stated he was in favor of having Council Member Broussard Vickers remain as the liaison to the Planning and Zoning Commission noting he was not against rotating liaisons in the future. Commissioner DeVine stated that he was disappointed that Council came to the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, spoke their minds and left without ascertaining what the Planning and Zoning Commission actually does. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers told the Commission that any time the Commission desires to have the entire Council present at a meeting, to just ask. Chairperson Hanson stated that he desired Council Member Broussard Vickers to be the regular liaison, but was fine with rotating other Council Members in attempt to keep them abreast of activities covered by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Mr. Wilharber, 6849 Centerville Road, stated that at the last Council Meeting, a Council Member had stated that the previous council had set up liaisons to committees/commissions due to a shortage of staff. Mr. Wilharber explained that the former Council had set up liaisons to keep communication flowing noting it is easier for someone who understands the aspects of planning and zoning to assist the Planning and Zoning Commission at its meetings and keep Council informed of what is happening. He then commented that the Council Member’s statement was in error as the liaisons arrangement was not instituted due to a lack of Staff as Council did not feel it was the job of Staff to act as a liaison to committees. Page 6 of 8 March 3, 2001 Planning and Zoning Minutes Commissioner DeVine stated he was fine with the request of Council to have a member present at Council meetings once a quarter. Commissioner Hanson thanked Council Member Broussard Vickers for coming to the meetings noting that it empowers the Commission to have her there to inform residents that the Council will be looking at the situation under the same parameters. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers told the Commission that Council had asked her to make them aware that when she advises them or comments at the meetings; it is on her own behalf and her own opinions, not the opinion of the entire Council. Consensus was to request that Council continue to allow Council Member Broussard Vickers to be the liaison to the Commission. Commissioner Kilian requested that members receive the Council agenda to determine if attendance is desired or needed. Mr. March concurred. 6.Acceptance of Mr. LaMotte’s resignation Motion by Commissioner DeVine, seconded by Commissioner Brainard to accept the resignation of Mr. LaMotte. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously. VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS Mr. March noted Council is discussing and reviewing design concepts, criteria and interviewing landscape architecture firms for building designs in the downtown area. Stated that the developer who was previously interested in constructing a grocery store in town is no longer interested due to the construction of a Super Target, Cub Foods and another big grocery store chain in the City of Lino Lakes. Mr. March stated that a hotel/restaurant combination rumor had been heard around town. Commissioner Kilian stated that when Goetz Landscaping & Irrigation appeared before both the Commission and Council, they stated that they had no intent on selling fresh, cut flowers and they currently are. Commissioner Kilian also stated that he had spoken with the owner of Centerville Floral who stated that competition is cutting into her business. Commissioner Kilian questioned if a business could be held accountable for what was previously brought before both the Commission and Council versus what actually has taken place. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers stated that, unfortunately, there is no way to regulate the businesses to that extent. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers stated that it is unfortunate that as the City grows, competition increases and cuts into smaller businesses profits. Mr. March stated he told Mr. Vanderbeek that there would be a pizza restaurant opening a business in the new strip mall, in order to give him time to consider how he will handle the competition. Page 7 of 8 March 3, 2001 Planning and Zoning Minutes VII. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES 1.February 6, 2001 Meeting Minutes Chairperson Hanson requested the following changes: On the first page switch Hanson and LaMotte around as LaMotte is incorrectly referred to as the Chair. On Page 5 of 10 second paragraph, third line, change the word “same” to “some”. Motion by Commissioner DeVine, seconded by Commissioner Brainard to approve the February 6, 2001 Meeting Minutes as amended. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously. 2.February 13, 2001 Workshop Meeting Minutes Chairperson Hanson noted there was not a closing time on the minutes. Motion by Commissioner DeVine, seconded by Commissioner McLean to approve the February 13, 2001 Workshop Meeting Minutes as presented. Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Abstain – 1 (Kilian). Motion carried. Commissioner Brainard requested that the packets be three-hole punched allowing placement in their three0ring binders. Mr. March concurred. Commissioner Brainerd also requested that it be noted on the agenda what the action items are for each new business item so the Commission is aware of what is being asked of it. Chairperson Hanson questioned whether individuals have the ability to access ordinances from the City’s website. Mr. March stated this item may be addressed by the Ad Hoc Communications group. VIII. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner DeVine, seconded by Commissioner Kilian to adjourn the March 6, 2001 Planning Commission Meeting at 8:28 p.m. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously. Transcribed by: Joan Lenzmeier, Recording Secretary TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. Proofed by: Teresa Bender, Clerk/Treasurer Page 8 of 8