Laserfiche WebLink
Regular Planning CommissionMeeting <br />Minutes –Wednesday, June 4, 2014 <br />Page 12 <br />PLANNING FILE 14-012 <br />b. <br />558 <br />Request by Vogel Sheetmetal, Inc. for approval of limited production and <br />559 <br />processing of sheetmetal as an INTERIM USE at 2830 Fairview Avenue <br />560 <br />Chair Gisselquist opened the Public Hearing for Planning File 14-009 at 8:03p.m. <br />561 <br />Senior Planner Bryan Lloyd reviewed the request of the applicant to allow for light <br />562 <br />fabrication of ductwork and sheetmetal accessories as an INTERIM USE at 2830 <br />563 <br />Fairview Avenue, as detailed in the staff report dated June 4, 2014.As noted in Section <br />564 <br />4.2 of the staff report, Mr. Lloyd advised that recent efforts to facilitate reinvestment and <br />565 <br />redevelopment for properties in the Twin Lakes Redevelopment Area include a proposal <br />566 <br />for re-designation of this property, and others in the neighborhood, from High Density <br />567 <br />Residential (HDR-1) to Community Mixed Use (CMU), with the proposed use then <br />568 <br />becoming permitted, and the temporary Interim Use permit no longer needed. <br />569 <br />Mr. Lloyd advised that the relocation of this business to Roseville was due to them <br />570 <br />outgrowing their current Stillwater, MN location.Mr. Lloyd advisedthat there was no <br />571 <br />indication that there would be significant noise impacts for residential neighbors on the <br />572 <br />north and therefore no significant impact to public health, safety or welfare, as detailed in <br />573 <br />Section 5.4.c of the staff report.Mr. Lloyd noted that noise of previous uses (e.g. <br />574 <br />Aramark) and truck traffic would have been significantly higher than this proposed use on <br />575 <br />the adjacent residential neighborhood. <br />576 <br />On an essentially unrelated note, Mr. Lloyd noted that the right-of-way on part of Terrace <br />577 <br />Drive was beyond the street itself on the western portion; and suggested that the Public <br />578 <br />Works Department was interested in working with the property owner on a pathway <br />579 <br />easement or acquisition of right-of-way to facilitate extending the pathway.However, Mr. <br />580 <br />Lloyd reiterated that this was not a condition of approval for the Interim Use. <br />581 <br />Mr. Lloyd advised that, after staff’s analysis of the request, they recommended approval <br />582 <br />of the requestfor a five-year Interim Use, unless it was discontinuedby the applicant <br />583 <br />and/or the permitted use changes as noted by re-designation of the zoning district. <br />584 <br />At the request of Member Cunningham, Mr. Lloyd advised that there was a pending <br />585 <br />Purchase Agreement for the property at this time by Vogel Sheetmetal. <br />586 <br />As he drove by the subject property, Chair Gisselquist questioned how long the property <br />587 <br />had been vacant; and asked if truck traffic or employee/customer parking would be <br />588 <br />housed in the Terrace Drive and/or Fairview Drive.Mr. Lloyd responded that there was a <br />589 <br />small parking lot off Fairview Avenue, with loading doors and employee parking off <br />590 <br />Terrace Drive.At the request of Chair Gisselquist, Mr. Lloyd confirmed that there was an <br />591 <br />existing chain link fence on the north and east of the property in some places that would <br />592 <br />serve as a limited buffer to residential properties on the north. <br />593 <br />At the request of Member Murphy, Mr. Lloyd confirmed that re-use of the property, since <br />594 <br />it had stood vacant for over one year and grandfathered status elapsed, screening <br />595 <br />requirements would be triggered in accordance with today’s code, and their type yet to be <br />596 <br />determined (e.g. privacy fence, screening wall, or coniferous plantings).At the request of <br />597 <br />Member Murphy, Mr. Lloyd clarified that they were part of code requirements, and <br />598 <br />therefore not needed as a condition of approval. <br />599 <br />Subsequent to preparation of the staff report, Mr. Lloyd advised that he receiveda phone <br />600 <br />call from a neighboring property owner earlier today, seeking staff’s rationale in not <br />601 <br />including that screening as a condition of approval.Mr.Lloyd noted that the caller as in <br />602 <br />tonight’s audience, and may wish to speak to the issue during public comment. <br />603 <br />At the request of Member Murphy, Mr. Lloyd addressed the mechanics or process if and <br />604 <br />when the zoning changed from HDR-1 to CMU and status of the Interim Use (IU) Permit, <br />605 <br />as detailed in Section 7.0 of the staff report. <br />606 <br />At the request of Member Daire, Mr. Lloyd confirmed that the IU would then become a <br />607 <br />legal conforming use; and the applicant did not need to secure verification that it was <br />608 <br /> <br />