Loading...
2003-03-25 Planning Comm MinutesPlanning Commission Meeting March 25, 2003 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES March 25, 2003 The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Cammission was held on Tuesday, March 25, 2003 in the Council Chambers at City Hall, ll O1 Victoria Curve. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. The following Commissioners were present: Chair Lorberbaum, Commissioners B. McManus, Betlej, Dolan, and M. McManus. City Staff present were Public Works Director Jim Danielson and Administrative Assistant Patrick C. Hollister. Also present was Planner Alan Brixius. Minutes were recorded by Becki Shaffer. Those excused: Commissioners Miller and Hesse. Chair Lorberbaum said that Cases No. 03-09 (Burow Farm) and 03-13 (Michael Bader) are expected to be tabled. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The Commission reviewed the minutes of February 25, 2003. The following changes were made: • Page 5, 8th paragraph, 3rd sentence should read: "When I was reading this, it was not clear to me whether we could approve building on slopes in excess of 18%." • Page 7, last paragraph should read: "Referring to Page 18, Section 3.2.e.: If somebody comes to us with a request for a subdivision, and the slope is greater than 18%, does item "e" prohibit this?" • Page 11, 3rd paragraph, 2"d sentence should read: "As a starting point, I would like to have some to address the issue of old cars, trucks, etc." • Page 12, 2"d paragraph should read: "When is this anticipated to come before the Commission again?" • Page 10, 6th paragraph, 2°d sentence should read: "I think it would be important to look into how we talk about all aspects of the property such as structures, what's left on the property, etc." COMMISSIONER M. MCMANUS MOVED, SECONDED BY CHAIR LORBERBAUM, TO APPROVED THE MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 25, 2003 AS CORRECTED. 4 AYES 0 NAYS 1 Abstain (Commissioner Betlej) MOTION CARRIED Planning Commission Meeting March 25, 2003 HEA RINGS PLANNING CASE #03-07 Children's Country Day School 1588 South Victoria Road CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR ADDITION Mr. Brixius introduced the application for a CUP to construct an addition onto an existing building, which is located at the intersection of Victoria Road and County Road 13. A 224 sq. ft. building addition is being proposed which is needed far lunch and meeting space for teachers and support staf£ The site is zoned R-1, in which private day care schools are allowed by CUP. This addition would meet all setback requirements, and would not cause the need for additional parking spaces as the capacity of the school will not be expanded. Materials must match existing structure. Gail Johnson, 583 Allen Lane, Eagan, Minnesota is the co-director for the daycare school. Ms. Johnson said the staff inembers are looking forward to having more space to eat their lunch and share comradery with fellow co- workers. Commissioner M. McManus asked if the school is currently licensed by the Department of Human Services and in compliance with all the licensing, and will the addition require any additional licensing. Ms. Johnson said they were in compliance, and no further licensing is needed as the space will be used only for staff. Chair Lorberbaum asked if it was the intent of the school that the addition will match the existing color and style of the building. Ms. Johnson said that was correct. Chair Lorberbaum opened the public hearing. There being no one present wishing to speak, a motion will be asked to close the public hearing. COMMISSIONER BETLEJ MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER B. MCMANUS, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. 5 AYE S 0 NAYS MOTION CARRIED Chair Lorberbaum closed the public hearing. COMMISSIONER B. MCMANUS MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER, BETLEJ TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AS PRESENTED. 5 AYES 0 NAYS MOTION CARRIED Planning Commission Meeting March 25, 2003 PLANNING CASE #03-08 Rongitsch Properties 2180 Lexington Avenue South PRELIMINARY PLAT, "NATER ESTATES" Mr. Brixius introduced the request to subdivide a 2.16 acre site, in which approXimately 1.8 acres will be left after the dedication of right of way for Lexington Avenue. The subdivision is intended to be named Nater Estates, and is located at the corner of Cullen Avenue and Lexington Avenue South. The site is zoned R-1 and the lot requirements indicate LeXington Avenue is intended to have a 100 ft. right of way. The applicant will need to dedicate a 50 ft. section of right of way along Lexington Avenue as part of this plat. The proposed lots are all in compliance with the 15,000 sq. ft. R-1 standard, however when looking at the lot configurations to meet the 100 ft. width, the side lots on parcels B and C are jogged, and parcel A has only an 80 ft. width. Parcel A is a corner lot. In this case, the proposed subdivision for the corner lot also requires a 30 ft. setback which results in a very narrow building pad. Section 5.2(3) of the ordinance states that the lot ]ines are to be right angles to street lines. The proposed site does not have the needed width along Cullen Avenue to meet these requirements and it is envisioned to have negative impacts related to lawn maintenance and boundary line disputes. Staff believes the other option would be to plot at 100 ft. widths across Cullen Avenue, and leaving an 80 ft. width with the 40 ft. building pad on the corner. Staff believes the configuration as presented is compliant with code and recommends denial. Commissioner B. McManus asked if the potential owners would not understand there is a jog in the property line. Mr. BriXius said as properties change hands, the relationship as far as front lot lines and who is responsible for what's in front of the house becomes obscured. The alternative would be to go to a more standard subdivision design where the property line would run through the property with a right angle to the street. Commissioner B. McManus asked if there are any negatives with the 80 ft. lot on the corner. Mr. Brixius said there is in meeting the required setbacks of 30 ft. and 10 ft., and resulting in a 40 ft. building pad width. This becomes an issue as far as the desirability and buildability of the building pad. A variance would be needed for the 80 ft. width from the requirement of 100 ft. width. Mr. Danielson said the corner lot would have 100 ft. along Lexington Avenue. Commissioner B. McManus asked if a variance would then not be needed. Mr. Brixius said with corner lots, the City allows the owner to designate which yard would be the front yard, and which would be the side yard. In this case, the property owner could pick Lexington Avenue frontage to be the front yard. Commissioner polan asked if the frontage could be on Lexington Avenue even though Cullen Avenue is viewed as the practical frontage. Mr. Danielson said that was correct. Chair Lorberbaum asked how to specify which one is the frontage if it's not by where the driveway, mailbox, or the front of the house is located. Mr. Danielson said corner lots are difficult situations and to avoid variances, the ordinance has been adjusted to allow the property owner to pick which is to be the front yard of the lot. In this case, the address would be 3 Planning Commission Meeting March 25, 2003 Lexington Avenue, but the driveway would be on Cullen Avenue because the County does not want any more driveway access onto Lexington Avenue. Commissioner Betlej asked if it was a requirement that access be provided in order to allow the chosen yard be designated as the front yard. Mr. Brixius said generally a couple of issues come into play when determining the front yard. It is the Planner's opinion that although there is enough frontage on Lexington Avenue to meet the minimum standards of 100 ft., the front of the lot should be on Cullen Avenue from the standpoint there is a requirement of a 30 ft setback off Lexington and a rear yard setback which is greater than the 10 ft on the side that would further narrow the building pad. Chair Lorberbaum asked for clarification in that it would be in the property owner's best interest to call Cullen Avenue as the front even though it is not 100 ft. Mr. Brixius said there is sufficient frontage along both the Lexington Avenue and Cullen Avenue to meet the 100 ft. width requirement. Chair Lorberbaum asked if there are minimum size requirements for homes. Mr. Danielson said the minimum requirement far a single family home is 1,000 sq. ft. of useable floor space area above grade, and to have 50% of this space be above a basement. Chair Lorberbaum read some questions that were submitted by Commissioner Hesse: 1. If the City needs to give a variance, what is the hardship? 2. Do the Xcel Energy lines affect the proposed development? 3. Is there a possible hardship on the lot layout due to the presence of the electrical lines? 4. What hardship might the slope along the south portion of each of the lots offer? Mr. Brixius said the issue is what creates a hardship on the lot width, not the lot area. All the ]ots are in compliance with requirements of the R-1 standard. The hardship comes through the public action of requiring the additional 50 ft. right of way off Lexington Avenue. If the City finds that because of existing conditions along Lexington Avenue is 33 ft., a hardship would be justified. In this case however, the proposed homes would not be impacted. Commissioner polan asked if the right of way is 50 ft. from Lexington, and there is a 100 ft. right of way requirement, where would the other 50 ft. be? Mr. Brixius said it goes from the center line westward to the center line of Lexington Avenue. Commissioner polan asked if the requirement of ineeting at right angles to the street requires a variance. Mr. Brixius said the Planner's recommendation is to not approve in the current condition, but instead to have the lot lines adjusted, and it may be possible to need a variance. Commissioner polan asked if there were any dedication requirements. Mr. BriXius said there would be a parkland dedication required, and it is possible for subdivisions to make a cash contribution in lieu of property donation at the discretion of the Council Commissioner M. McManus asked if there are any considerations in terms of subdividing this property in light of the power lines. Mr. Brixius said the setbacks are being met and would not be an issue. 4 Planning Commission Meeting March 25, 2003 Chair Lorberbaum asked if the widths of the lots are comparable to the neighborhood. Mr. Brixius said that was correct. Commissioner Betlej asked if there were any restrictions to providing access to Lexington. Mr. Brixius said any plat that abuts a county road has to be reviewed by the County. In most cases, any property that also has access to another street would then be denied access to the county road. Commissioner Betlej said if this could not be created without a variance, a case could probably be made that access could be gained from LeXington. Mr. Brixius said conditions can be made on the approval to deny any access off Lexington Avenue. Mr. Brixius said it was likely the County would not approve the permit as it would not be desireable to have a home accessing off LeXington Avenue. Even though it would be consistent with the neighboring properties, the County would not wish to have another driveway on Lexington Avenue. Commissioner B. McManus asked if Staff is recommending that the applicant should revise his plan. Mr. Brixius said that was correct, and their recommendation is that although the site has sufficient area to meet three lots, the design is not appropriate. Mr. Brixius said the Commission can direct the applicant to continue the public hearing to allow them to make revisions to be brought back to the next meeting. Michael Rongitsch, 16791 Lakeview Court, Lakeville, Minnesota is the applicant. Mr. Rongitsch asked why he would need a variance. Mr. Brixius said the subdivision rules specifically state that side lot lines be right angles to the street and in this respect, the jogged side property lines are inconsistent with that provision. Mr. Rongitsch presented a revised plan showing straight lot lines. This proposal will therefore replace the origina] plan that was submitted with the application. Commissioner polan asked if this revised plan can be voted on without going through the city process again. Chair Lorberbaum said that typically, it would be unusual to get a new submission and make decisions as in this case, and would recommend that if the Commission wants to think about this, any further discussion could be tabled until the next meeting. Commissioner B. McManus said there is still a problem with the 80 ft. frontage and there needs to be a decision made on this parcel. Chair Lorberbaum said that was correct, in which case a variance would be needed for that, as well as a notice to the surrounding neighbors. Mr. Danielson said the ordinance provides that the property owner can pick front yard preference on a corner lot so a variance would not then be necessary. Commissioner Betlej said that in this case, there still would be a rear setback concern and would still need a variance. Chair Lorberbaum said the applicant has the choice of either make Cullen Avenue the front yard for the corner lot in which case a variance would be needed for the front width, or he can have Lexington Avenue be the front yard, which would also need a variance for the rear yard setback. Chair Larberbaum said in either case, a variance is needed, and proper notice has not been given to the surrounding neighbors. Commissioner B. McManus said asked for clarification that no matter which road the front yard is on, as long as there is 100 ft. width, the applicant can build and declare the designation of the front yard. Mr. Danielson said that has been done in the past. Commissioner B. McManus said therefore, there is a precedence here. 5 Planning Commission Meeting March 25, 2003 Commissioner Betlej asked the applicant if it has been considered to have one lot access Lexington, and the other two lots access Cullen. Mr. Rongitsch said he has considered that, and has talked to the County, finding that the County does not feel this would meet their criteria. Mr. Rongitsch said if he put a driveway onto Lexington, it would have to be one quarter mile from the intersection of Lexington and Cullen. Chair Lorberbaum asked if the applicant has considered two lots instead of three. Mr. Rongitsch said he has not because he meets all the criteria for three lots. Commissioner polan said he is still troubled by the interpretation that gives somebody the right to pick which frontage they want to use. In this case, should the applicant decide that Lexington Avenue is the frontage, it then would not matter how wide his lot was. Mr. Danielson said he would be able to construct a house at that point. Commissioner polan said then the house could be made as narrow as possible in order to meet the setback requirements, and would seem to be an odd result. Commissioner M. McManus referred to the original proposal that was reviewed, saying that technically the applicant has met the requirements of the ordinance but not the intent of the ordinance. There has been some jogging on some subdivisions proposed in recent past, and would like to have some clarification of why this instance is any different. Mr. Danielson said he would have to research that. Commissioner M. McManus said she does not want to be inconsistent with the intent of the ordinance while the background says technically the applicant is meeting the requirements of the ordinance. Mr. Brixius said that at the front building setback line, the applicant has 100 ft. and is in compliance with the zoning ordinance, but the jogging of the lot ]ines just to satisfy that requirement results in irregular ]ot lines which would be inconsistent with the subdivision ordinance. The intent is to establish uniform lots in a manner that people can feel comfortable with their property lines. Commissioner M. McManus asked if the applicant could consider two lots instead of three as there is a struggle here. Chair Lorberbaum said there needs to be a variance if there are three lots. Mr. Rongitsch asked what the reason would be. Chair Lorberbaum said if Lexington Avenue is the front yard, then there needs to be a backyard setback, and if Cullen is used, there needs to be a variance for the front yard. In either case, a hardship needs to be identified. Chair Lorberbaum opened the public hearing. Ann Post, 1090 Cullen Avenue, stated her concerns with the three driveways on Cullen Avenue being so close to the intersection. Ms. Post said this is a very dangerous corner. Chair Lorberbaum said she would like to see a motion made to table this public hearing. Commissioner B. McManus said the Planner is saying something different than what the Staff is saying, and the question is "do we go by precedence and past practice, or do we not?" Chair Lorberbaum said historically, the Planning Commission has not gone by precedence, but have looked at each case individually. The past can be looked upon as a guideline, however each case must be judged on its own unique merits. Planning Commission Meeting March 25, 2003 Commissioner Betlej said he wants to do things the proper way and it seems like the revised map makes more sense and would like to try to identify a hardship in order to obtain the variance. Chair Lorberbaum said if this is tabled, there would be an opportunity to send out the proper notification for the variance. Commissioner polan said it would be his preference to deny the subdivision request and then recommend the new proposal come before the Commission as there may be some timeframe issues. Mr. Hollister said the city has the right to unilaterally add an additional 60 days onto the initial 60 day period and if the Planning Commission chooses to continue the public hearing to the April meeting, City Staff will proceed with the notification. Chair Larberbaum said the applicant has withdrawn the original plan and the second plan is the one to work on. Mr. Rongitsch said that was correct. Mr. Brixius said his preference would be to leave the application open to avoid having the applicant reapplying, and then just apply for the variance. Chair Larberbaum said a continuance would be tabling to allow for the proper notification. Commissioner B. McManus suggested voting on something in order to obtain a clear message so that the applicant will not come back and say the Commission voted to deny the proposal when Staff indicated this would be acceptable. Commissioner B. McManus asked if the public hearing is closed, does that mean it cannot be reopened? Chair Lorberbaum said she believes that a new public hearing could be held after the proper notification has been sent. Mr. Hollister said the public hearing can be closed at this time and reopened in April. Notification would go out regarding the subdivision and variance request. This can be considered a continuation of the application, and the Planner would be required to write a new review. COMMISSIONER B. MCMANUS MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BETLEJ, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. 5 AYES 0 NAYS MOTION CARRIED Chair Larberbaum closed the public hearing. COMMISSIONER B. MCMANUS MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE SITE PLAN WITH THE ASSUMPTION THAT NO VARIANCE IS NECESSARY. No second has been made. Motion dead. COMMISSIONER BETLEJ MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER M. MCMANUS TO TABLE THIS APPLICATION UNTIL THE APRIL PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. 4 AYES 1 NAYS (Commissioner B. McManus) MOTION CARRIED Chair Lorberbaum said the Planner would like to have some feedback as to whether it is desired to have three lots ar two lots. Planning Commission Meeting March 25, 2003 Commissioner polan said there is no firm idea yet as to all of the issues that this entails and doesn't feel a clear implication can be presented. Commissioner Betlej said it appears a resubmittal suggests that this is a respectable use of the property. Commissioner B. McManus said he agrees with this and that the plat which has been presented fits very well with the current character of the neighborhood and would enhance the neighborhood as well. Commissioner M. McManus said she liked the 2"d submission of design and is more typical of the subdivision pattern, and would like more detail on the Lexington Avenue access issue. Chair Lorberbaum said she is more comfortable with the three lots as designed in the revised design. PLANNING CASE #03-09 Burows Farm LLP: Dan Tilsen 1875 Victoria Road PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR 7-LOT SUBDIVISION Chair Lorberbaum announced that this case has been tabled. Mr. Tilsen's wife has recently passed away and Mr. Tilsen has requested this case be tabled until the April meeting. Chair Larberbaum expressed the Commission's sympathies to Mr. Tilsen, and to Mrs. Tilsen's family. COMMISSIONER BETLEJ MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER DOLAN TO TABLE THIS APPLICATION UNTIL THE APRIL PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. 5 AYE S 0 NAYS MOTION CARRIED PLANNING CASE #03-10 Peter Wilton 1069 Douglas Road CRITICAL AREA PERMIT FOR HOUSE CONSTRUCTION Mr. Brixius introduced the request for a Critical Area Permit to construct a single family home. The subject property in an in-fill lot in an eXisting development otherwise developed. The applicant is proposing to construct a home on a lot having setbacks equal to those in the neighboring properties (approximately 42 ft. abutting Douglas Road). The lot slopes with approXimately 14%; there are no areas of either 18% or 40% grades. The applicant proposes to grade the lot to create a building site by cutting the slope and constructing a boulder retaining wall of mare than 6 ft. in height, and a second retaining wall is being proposed of similar height. Mr. Brixius said that any retaining wall higher than 4 ft. is required to be an engineered wall, and as the Critical Area requires natural materials to be used in landscaping, boulder walls cannot be engineered. Engineered walls are greater than 4 ft. high, and require more support than a wall lower than 4'. Mr. Brixius reviewed the landscape plan and indicated how the retaining walls should be constructed, using a tiered fashion. Planning Commission Meeting March 25, 2003 The applicant can however, install two 4 ft. retaining walls in a tiered fashion and still use the boulder wall material. Mr. Peter Wilton, applicant, currently resides at 1140 Northwood Drive, Apt. #233, Eagan, Minnesota. Mr. Wilton referred to the landscape plan and made a drawing to explain how the walls will look. Mr. Wilton's landscaper has no problems with constructing the tiered wall. Chair Lorberbaum asked if there are any concerns with the locations of the walls. Mr. Brixius said the retaining walls are going to be dictated by how the site is graded, and there is same fleXibility in this planning. Chair Lorberbaum opened the public hearing. Brenda Health, 1051 Douglas Road, asked far an explanation of the Critical Area. Mr. Hollister explained the history of the Critical Area and the intent of it's regulations. Ms. Health asked about a stream running through the proposed property. Mr. Danielson said this was a city storm water pipe and construction will not affect it. COMMISSIONER BETLEJ MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER B. MCMANUS TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. 5 AYES 0 NAYS MOTION CARRIED Chair Lorberbaum closed the public hearing. COMMISSIONER BETLEJ MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER DOLAN, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE CRITICAL AREA PERMIT AS PRESENTED WITH THE ADDENDUM THAT THE RETAINING WALL BE NO HIGHER THAN 4 FT. 5 AYES 0 NAYS MOTION CARRIED PLANNING CASE #03-11 Stephen Barry 1733 Vicki Lane VARIANCE REQUEST FOR YARD AND SETBACK REQUIREMENTS Mr. Brixius introduced the request variance to allow for an eXisting shed to be located on the lot line in the side yard. The applicant currently has a 8 ft. X 12 ft. structure placed on the property line of a corner lot at the intersection of Vicki Lane and Douglas Street. Section 4.6(1) of the zoning ordinance states that no accessory structure shall be closer than 5 ft. from any side or rear lot line. Planning Commission Meeting March 25, 2003 Mr. Brixius said it is possible to place this shed on another area of the property to stay in compliance with the ordinance. Staffhas not identified a hardship, and therefore is recommending denial of the request. Mr. Brixius said he has not had any conversations with the applicant regarding options for the relocation of the shed. Mr. Hollister said Mr. Barry spoke with City Staff regarding his reasons for placing the shed where it is. Commissioner M. McManus asked how this case came to light. Mr. Danielson said it came to the attention of Code Enforcement Officer. Stephen Barry, 1733 Vicki Lane, is the applicant. Mr. Barry asked for clarification of the 30 ft right of way. Mr. Brixius said the 30 ft. setback begins at the property line. Mr. Barry explained that he placed the shed on the current location because he cannot put it anywhere else due to the location of existing trees and gardens. Mr. Barry said there are bushes between the curb and the property line which provides screening from Douglas Road, and he does not wish to have his shed be an eyesare to his neighbars to the rear of his property. Mr. Barry said he has obtained signatures from his neighbors in support of the current location of the shed. Mr. Barry said he does not have a true hardship, but feels this is the best location. Mr. Barry said the shed has been in this location since October, 2001. Chair Lorberbaum reminded the applicant that a hardship needs to be identified in order to approve a variance. Mr. Barry said he had a hardship of any location he would have to place the shed. Chair Lorberbaum said there is nothing in the ordinances that says that every homeowner has the right to put up an accessory structure whether it fits in their yard comfortably with or without a fence, and that no one is guaranteed the right to place a shed where one wants to; that does not qualify to be a hardship. Mr. Barry said he does not understand the reasoning for this. Mr. Barry asked if there was an ordinance that would address placing the shed in his front yard. Mr. Brixius said all accessory buildings are required to be placed in either a side or rear yard. Mr. Barry said it cannot be in the front yard, and the side yard is only a certain size and that is his hardship. Mr. Barry said the rear yard has no room to place a shed. Chair Lorberbaum said the Planner is saying that whether the applicant likes it or not, the shed could be placed in the rear yard inside the fenced area. Mr. Barry said the Planner has not physically looked at the property, and therefore is not aware of the trees in the rear yard that will not allow for a shed to be placed there, unless Mr. Barry cuts down a tree. Commissioner Betlej asked about placing the shed in the rear yard. Mr. Barry said he does not think the neighbors would like to look at the shed. Commissioner B.McManus said the applicant seems to be saying it is undesireable to move the shed, but it would not be a hardship to move it to another location, nor has the applicant indicated his willingness to remove the shed entirely from the property. Mr. Barry said the hardship in removing the shed is that he would not have any place to store some items that are currently stored in the shed, and therefore would have to place all his equipment in the yard in full view of the neighbors, and that the neighbors would rather look at a pretty shed. Commissioner B. McManus said he looked at the property and said he did not think the shed looked very pretty in it's present location. Mr. Barry said that was Commissioner B. McManus' opinion to which he is entitled. Commissioner B. McManus said that is why the Commission needs to have principles to follow. Chair Lorberbaum opened the public hearing. � Planning Commission Meeting March 25, 2003 Dave Sanders, 980 Douglas Road, resides directly across from Mr. Barry's side yard and is in support of the variance. Mr. Sanders feels the shed is consistent with the neighborhood, and that Mr. Barry has done an eXcellent job in maintaining his property. Walt Petroski, 1720 Vicki Lane, expressed his opposition to the shed and said that the shed could be placed easily in the rear yard. Mr. Petroski said the shed is not pretty to look at. Mr. Petroski commented on another shed on Douglas Road that also is thought to be undesireable. Carl Severs, 956 Douglas Road, expressed his opposition to the variance because there is no hardship involved. Mr. Severs said he was concerned that this would set precedence for other residents, and would support the City Planner's recommendation. COMMISSIONER B. MCMANUS MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BETLEJ, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. 5 AYES 0 NAYS MOTION CARRIED Chair Larberbaum closed the public hearing. CHAIR LORBERBAUM MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BETLEJ, TO RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THE VARIANCE DUE TO THE FINDING THERE HAS BEEN NO HARDSHIP IDENTIFED. Further discussion Commissioner polan said he drove by the property and feels that even with the eXisting screening; it is still visible from all other areas. Commissioner polan said there is no legal basis to grant the variance and will vote for denial. Commissioner M. McManus mentioned the memo received from Mr. Hollister, dated March 25, 2003, stating that Mrs. Cindy Johnson phoned the city to asked that the following comments from the Johnson's be conveyed regarding their opposition to the variance. • Mr. Barry has enough space in his backyard to place the shed in a location that conforms to all setbacks. • Mr. Barry should have checiced with the City regarding ordinances and permit requirements before building the shed. • Mr. Barry has no demonstrable hardship justifying the variance. • Approval of this variance would set a precedence allowing residents to build sheds wherever they wish. • Although Mrs. Johnson cannot see the shed from her property, she does drive by it on her way to work, and she can see it in its current location from her car. Commissioner M. McManus and Chair Lorberbaum both agreed the shed can be placed in another location. � Planning Commission Meeting March 25, 2003 Mr. Barry asked if he needs to go through this procedure again in order to move the shed. Mr. Brixius said the shed can be moved without this procedure as long as it complies with the ordinance. Chair Lorberbaum said the case will go to the City Council, and it is possible that they will approve the shed as it is, thereby granting the variance. 5 AYES 0 NAYS MOTION CARRIED PLANNING CASE #03-12 Irina Kim, International Gymnastics Club 2425 Enterprise Drive, Suite 800 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A GYMNASTICS CLUB IN AN INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICT. Mr. Brixius introduced the request for a CUP to allow the International Gymnastics Club to rent a tenant bay that has 6,436 sq. ft. that is currently designated for warehouse use. According to the applicant, the gymnastic classes are planned to adhere to the following schedule: 5:30 pm to 9:00 pm Monday thru Friday 9:00 am to 3:30 pm Saturday After 3:30 pm Saturday - private lesson only 7:30 am to 5:00 pm Sunday - private lesson only Mr. Brixius said the modifications needed to the interior of the building include padding and carpeting on the floor and placement of mirror throughout the space. The CUP criteria for evaluating this case are based on the recommendations of the Planning Commission, with the proposed use upon the health, safety, and welfare of the occupants, or surrounding lands. Anticipated traffic conditions and the effects of the proposed use of the Comprehensive Plan shall also be taken into consideration. Mr. Brixius said the only issue they see is the traffic generation, which is different that other industrial uses. It is anticipated the traffic volumes will be more consumer related, and the peak hours of operation will compliment the balance of the industrial building. Any change in hours will require a CUP amendment. No signage details have been submitted. Commissioner B. McManus said he drove by the area and believes there is plenty of parking available. Commissioner Betlej said he has seen this use consistent across the country within industrial parks. Commissioner Betlej asked how these hours have been determined. Mr. Brixius said the applicant had suggested them. Commissioner Betlej asked if there is any reason to limit usage on Saturday and Sunday. Mr. Brixius said it was his opinion that there is no reason, but is merely following the offer by the applicant. Commissioner Betlej said that he would conclude that if classes are held after 4:00 pm, there should not be any concerns with parking and traffic. Mr. Brixius said if the Commission feels there is adequate parking and the hours are acceptable, the request could be approved without any restrictions. Commissioner Betlej asked if l2 Planning Commission Meeting March 25, 2003 there were any concerns from a property use standpoint. Mr. Brixius said the Commission should inquire about the enrollment capacity to get an idea of potential traffic generation during full enrollment. Chair Lorberbaum said she was comfortable with making hours earlier, but is uncertain about possible late hours. Chair Lorberbaum said while upon visiting the site early on Sunday morning, and the fact that she feels very safe in Mendota Heights, expressing her appreciation for the police force in the city, she felt ]ike she was in the middle of nowhere. Chair Lorberbaum asked if there are any concerns about having the classes held until 9:30 pm, especially during dark winter nights. Mr. Brixius said it needs to be assumed that the business operation and the people responsible far the enrollees will take responsibility for the safety within the parking lot. The following applicants were present to answer questions: Terri Marshik Program Director of the International Gymnastics Club; Irina Kim, Head Coach. Ms. Marshik said International Gymnatics is brand new, and currently have 25 members of the competition team and 25 young girls just starting out. Ms. Marshik said on a national level, there are only about 30 clubs, with approximately 1,000 girls. This is not artistic gymnastics, but a rhythmic gymnastics, which is seen only at Olympic time. Because the club is highly competitive, working toward junior Olympic level and Olympic level only, hours are after school. Classes on Sunday will not go pass 5:00 pm because the kids need to rest before school on Monday. Ms. Marshik said enrollees are from all part of the state and most carpool, so parking may have maybe 3 or 4 cars. Ms. Marshik said the girls are excited about have a new home, as they are presently moving around the last three years utilizing other facilities such as schools and churches. Ms. Marshik expressed some interest in about a possible summer camp. The coaches said they would like to see a summer camp in July, and probably three weelcs in August. The hours would probably be 8:30 am to 4:30 am. A survey goes out to the enrollees to see what interest there is before any plans are made. Some periodic outings may also be arranged from time to time. It is anticipated that there would only be 3 days per week, for 7 weeks during summer camp, and there will absolutely be no overnight activities. The ages of the enrollees range from 3 years to 16 years of age. The club is safety certified by USA Gymnastics and trained in CPR. Commissioner M. McManus asked if there will be any flexibility in the conditional use permit regarding hours for summer camp. Mr. Brixius said that based on enrollment and available parking spaces, there seems to be no issue as far as traffic. Approval can be made with or without restriction of hours as the Commission feels appropriate. Chair Lorberbaum said hours can be set, with exceptional hours during summer camp so that the applicant need not come back for approvals each time. Commissioner M. McManus said that would be her preference. Commissioner M. McManus asked about proposals for signage. Ms. Marshik said they are not even considering signage until their enrollment goes up. When they do, they will have to make sure they adhere to all signage requirements. 13 Planning Commission Meeting March 25, 2003 Commissioner polan asked about the lease. Ms. Marshik said the lease was contingent upon approval of the City. Ms. Marshik referred to the letter which was submitted by United Properties, dated March 3, 2003. Chair Lorberbaum asked where the enrollees come from. Ms. Kim said they come from all over the state. Ms. Marshik said the organization is of very high caliber and is currently ranked in the top 25 in the nation. Chair Lorberbaum asked about the security. Ms. Marshik said there is a parent handbook that requires that no child goes in or out of the facility without a parent. Commissioner Betlej asked what the maXimum number of children is in the facility at any given time. Ms. Marshik said about 10. Mr. Hollister said the requirement far warehouse parking is 2 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. Commissioner Betlej said the parking therefore is not an issue. Commissioner B. McManus asked about restroom and locker facilities. Ms. Marshik indicated where the restrooms were, however there are no plans for locker space. It is noted that this club is mostly female, as only female competition is allowed. Males can participate in a artistic capacity only. Ms. Kim said most of the children are already dressed when they arrive, but it would be nice to have a locker area. Ms. Marshik said the signage will be handled through the lease agent. Chair Larberbaum opened the public hearing. There being no one present wishing to speak, a motion will be asked to close the public hearing. COMMISSIONER BETLEJ MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER DOLAN, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. 5 AYE S 0 NAYS U_� �� ..:: _1 Chair Lorberbaum closed the public hearing. COMMISSIONER BETLEJ MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER B. MCMANUS, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AS PRESENTED, WITH THE INCLUSION OF THE SIGNAGE BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY SIGN ORDINANCE, AND HOURS AS PRESENTED WITH SUMMER CAMP HOURS TO BE 8:30 AM TO 4:30 PM BETWEEN LABOR DAY AND MEMORIAL DAY, TO BE DEFINED AN A YEARLY BASIS. 5 AYES 0 NAYS MOTION CARRIED Commissioner M. McManus said this presentation was done very well and she is very excited to have this type of opportunity in Mendota Heights. Commissioner Betlej said Mendota Heights needs more Olympic athletes. 14 Planning Commission Meeting March 25, 2003 PLANNING CASE #03-13 Michael Bader 1673 Delaware PRELIMINARY PLAT AND VARIANCE Chair Lorberbaum said the applicant has asked that this case be tabled until the April meeting. Mr. Hollister said the applicant has copied all of the surrounding neighbors to inform them of the change. COMMISSIONER BETLEJ MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSION DOLAN, TO TABLE THE PUBLIC HEARING UNTIL THE APRIL MEETING. 5 AYES 0 NAYS MOTION CARRIED Commissioner B. McManus asked if a new notice will have to be sent. Mr. Hollister said it was not required, but the city will be sending a letter to Mr. Bader informing him of the Planning Commission action and extending the 60-day review period for an additional 60 days. Commissioner Betlej said it was his understanding that as part of the original application, proper notice was not made on a certain item. Mr. Hollister said when meeting with Mr. Bader before his formal application, Staff discussed the subdivision and wetland aspects. During review of the formal application, it was noticed that there may need to be a variance for a cul-de-sac longer than 500 ft. Mr. Hollister said there is some difference of opinion internally among city staff as to whether or not Mr. Bader needs a variance or not. At this point, city staff will be asking Mr. Bader to write a check for an additional $50.00 and publish a notice including subdivision wetlands permit and variance. The Planning Commission can then debate at will whether or not a variance is necessary for this. The cul-de- sac length issue is in the subdivision ordinance, and the language says that cul-de-sacs shall not normally be longer than 500 ft., and some people think that "normally" implies that it is not a hardfast rule, but merely a statement of a design preference on the part of the city, and therefore does not require a variance. PLANNING CASE #03-14 Paster Enterprises Trunk Highway 110 and Dodd Road PUD CONCEPT REVIEW FOR MENDOTA PLAZA EXPANSION Mr. Brixius said the applicant is asking far a concept review of a preliminary plat and seeking feedback from the Commission. The development proposal would be an expansion of a commercial facility in Mendota Plaza shopping center to form five separate additiona] building pads for retail and restaurant businesses. The current shopping center consists of approximately 60,000 sq. ft. of retail space, plus there is an existing Amoco station and McDonalds nearby. The new buildings proposed show approximately 52,000 sq. ft., and sits on about 10 acres. The component would include an extension of South Plaza Drive to Highway 110. A storm water pond will be created along the drainage area, and a bridge would be constructed that serves an internal street access. Mr. Brixius noted that Dodge Nature Center holds first rights to purchase the property from MnDOT. Therefore, the City Council will 15 Planning Commission Meeting March 25, 2003 need to determine whether this is an appropriate role for City participation. Also important to this concept would be MnDOT's approval of the proposed right-in, right-out access point with Highway 110. The applicant indicate the new buildings would be designed and built in an attractive, coordinated architectural styling, and any similar improvements for the existing structure would be done sometime in the future. The plan relies on a series of small, separate buildings which will mostly be served with individual parking lots. A trail plan is described that connects the southeast part of the project with trails to the south, but few internal connections. Considerations need to be taken regarding the proposed Town Center project to the north, and determining design standards that are desired. The design relies on four access points to the shopping center - two eXisting points (one each from Dodd Road and South Plaza Drive), and two more from the South Plaza Drive extension on the east. The guided land use and zoning on this site allow for mixed use development and the City should comment as to whether housing should be included with the commercial development as part of this project. Staff has no recommendations and is only seeking for eXpectation feedback from the City. Commissioner Betlej asked if there is a plat map that identifies lots 35, 36 and 38. Ken Henk, Paster Enterprises LLC, showed a similar site plan showing depicting these areas. Commissioner Betlej asked if the Planner had any comments regarding the traffic that will be generated from the new buildings and the typical access point that the average person would take to get to those buildings. Mr. Brixius said the applicant has indicated they have taken into consideration the previous traffic study that was done far Town Center by SEH and the City has not done any detailed analysis regarding traffic flow or distribution because there may be a number of renditions coming before the Commission. It is anticipated that the main entrance will be the southern drive as it's further away from the intersection of Highway 110 and Dodd Road. Commissioner Betlej asked if there has been any feedback from the Parks Commission. Mr. Hollister said information was provided to the Parks Commission. The Parks Commission did not have any particular comments except for a couple of commissioners remarked that it is adjacent to Dodge Nature Center; and that one commissioner referred to the area that Paster Enterprises is anticipating eXpanding into by saying this was a fairly high amenity natural wooded area and it was a shame to see it be developed, but took no formal action on it. Mr. Hollister said there seems to be some interest on the Parks Commission on how the transition will work between the commercial area and the Dodge Nature Center, and Dodge Nature Center is concerned about that also. Chair Lorberbaum asked for clarification: 1. Letter has been received from CDA expressing concerns. Do they have any say? 2. Does Dodge Nature Center have any voice in this? � Planning Commission Meeting March 25, 2003 Mr. Brixius said Dodge Nature Center certainly has some say as they have the option of first right of refusal among the parcels that's involved in this, so their cooperation will be interval to making this type of work move ahead. The CDA will have input through the public hearing process and any type of involvement that the City wishes to include them in. This is a very rough and initial concept plan, and modifications can be made reflective of the needs of anyone having some involvement. Mr. Hollister said the concept plan anticipate some transferred land from the CDA to Paster Enterprises and so they certainly have a hook in this if they are not enthusiastic about what is being proposed. Mr. Brixius said he doesn't believe there has been any resolutions are far as city's involvement in the construction of the street or decisions along those lines. Commissioner polan asked if the current entrance is sufficient for increased traffic. Mr. Brixius said the type of study that went into the Town Center is probably equally justified here as far as expansion of commercial uses and introduction of a mixed use arrangement. In that respect, when looking at Town Center, we involved SEH to come up with an idea of what kind of structure improvements would be essential to accommodate new growth. As the project proceeds, those issues should be looked at. Mr. Brixius said he has no opinion as to whether the current access has been evaluated to the extent that it can handle additional traffic up to this point. Commissioner polan asked if there was an existing trail shown on the plan. Mr. Danielson pointed out the trail on the plan. Commissioner polan asked how the trail can be better accommodated. There are a few things to look at, such as what is the ultimate land use that is envisioned for the area, and integrating the trail into the commercial area can be provided. There has been no pedestrian movement studied yet. Commissioner Betlej said the trail goes around the senior housing. Mr. Danielson said part of the trail was unpaved, and the city has received inquiries from the senior citizens to have this trail upgraded. Commissioner polan asked if there were any concerns about timing. Mr. Brixius said if this should be a total renovation, there should be an understanding of what will be done with the existing buildings and the timeframe of the implementation. It does not have to be immediate, and Town Center will be staying status quo. Commissioner M. McManus asked about the existing parking and questioned if it was sufficient. Mr. Brixius said he did not know, but would suspect that it would be adequate. Commissioner M. McManus said she was trying to recall if there had been any previous discussion on this. Chair Lorberbaum said the only discussion she recalls is that there is a nursery that is put in the parking each summer, and the feeling was that there was sufficient parking there with the nursery. Commissioner Betlej said there are 251 stalls in front of the center and 80 on the side, which would give 5 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. and is pretty much in line with the ordinance. Ken Henks introduced Edward Paster and Howard Paster of Paster Enterprises LLC, and architect Kathy Anderson with KKE Architects. Mr. Henks gave an overview of the layout of the project. Ms. Anderson passed out some information about KKE Architects for the Planning Commission's review. Mr. Henks said that parcels 35 and 36 are in MnDOT's hands, and Paster Enterprises have been working with them over the years to purchase those parcels. MnDot has recently approved to have an appraisal done and allow Paster Enterprises to make a purchase offer. Extensive hydrology studies have been performed to address the waterflow properties both downstream and upstream due to additional impervious surfaces. The two parcels are 9.74 acres and a very challenging site due to the topography, and there is a drainage ditch that runs through the property, as well as major trunk sewer lines. Mr. Henks said about 40% of the property will remain green space. l7 Planning Commission Meeting March 25, 2003 Mr. Henks explained the aspects of the bridge to be built over the drainage ditch, and also said the trail will be eXtended from the senior center into the development and the buildings facing the seniar center will be finished on all four sides to allow a desirable visual impact from the senior housing. Mr. Henks commented on Parcel 38, which Dodge Nature Center has the underlying feet and said there is a concern with transitioning the commercial aspect into the natural aspect of the Nature Center. Mr. Henks talked about a heavily ]andscaped boulevard along South Plaza Drive to act as a buffer and have the street extent out to Highway 110. Kathy Anderson reviewed the architectural design and aspects of the project. Ms. Anderson stressed how complicated redevelopment projects are in retail versus building from scratch, as well as being very expensive. Edward Paster, CEO of Paster Enterprises LLC, said being able to wark with KKE and Kathy Anderson is a real priviledge, and commented on her work with Tamarack Village, Arbor Lakes, and other centers that came from cornfields that no one ever expected these areas to be developed. Mr. Pastor said his company is very excited to have these expansions begin. Commissioner B. McManus asked about the height of the buildings. Ms. Anderson said they will be one-story buildings; however some are built to look like two-story, and reach 24 to 25 ft. Commissioner B. McManus asked if Mendota Heights has the demographics to support this type of development. Ms. Anderson said this will be a neighborhood-type development. Chair Lorberbaum said the developer has most likely done their homework or they would not be interested in this site. Mr. Henks said there is about 60,000 sq. ft. currently, and there is about 50,000 sq. ft. proposed for Town Center, plus an additional 50,000 sq. ft. proposed for this development, and is deemed to be a neighborhood center size as opposed to a community center size. The existing 60,000 sq. ft. currently holds no vacancies, which says it's time to expand. Mr. Henks said the Town Center will only add to the synergy of the intersection instead of being competition. Commissioner B. McManus asked what the plans are far the existing building. Ms. Anderson said the key in understanding any retail project is to have built-in flexibility. Not knowing the tenants that will be coming into play yet, there is a phased approach that could take place, and timing is not foreseeable. There will be material tie-ins and tricks to make the existing building fit into the design scheme. Timing will depend on the leasing. Mr. Henks said as they move into the design, they will look at the existing building to plan the best options for it. Ms. Anderson said that through out the city approval process, the elevations of the new building, as well as the commitment would be for the existing building, would be shown. Commissioner B. McManus asked how the City will be involved with funding. Mr. Henks said they are not seeking any funding now for the private development, but that any development with the roadway may have to have city involvement. Commissioner B. McManus said the current parking lot seems to be very large and empty, and asked how the traffic will be generated through there. Commissioner B. McManus said this was an excellent opportunity for 1�:3 Planning Commission Meeting March 25, 2003 Mendota Heights to have these attractive areas providing upscale amenities, and may be creating a signature area for the city. Chair Lorberbaum opened the discussion to the audience. No one came forward with comments. Commissioner Betlej said he liked the idea of smaller, clustered buildings. Commissioner Betlej asked to have information regarding the impact on Dodge Nature Center (such as lighting, traffic, buffers, etc.). Commissioner Betlej asked for clarification regarding main shopping center entrance off Dodd Road being eXtended to provide for traffic circulation. Mr. Henks said that roadway is to extend from the existing building to tie into proposed buildings, and demonstrated on the map how the traffic will flow. Commissioner Betlej said there seems to be a lot of traffic going close to storefronts, and may be a safety issue. Commissioner Betlej said it was expected that the 30% green space would be met. Ms. Anderson said that will definitely be exceeded. Commissioner Betlej commented on the trail connections being completed. Mr. Henks said it is their intention to upgrade as much as possible. Commissioner Betlej said he does not want signage to be an afterthought and wants to see a well developed plan. Ms. Anderson said the elements of the detail,lighting, signage, materials, etc. will all be included accarding to the guidelines. Commissioner Betlej said he would like to have all this wark tied together to be worked on at one time, and not have the existing buildings be ignored. Chair Larberbaum expressed her concern about signage and want them to be tasteful, and something more low key than pole signs. Chair Lorberbaum said she wants to see something done to make the pathways for the senior citizens more accessible. Chair Lorberbaum referred to the large green space south of the project and asked if the intent was to leave as greenspace. Ms. Anderson said that will be used for future development. Mr. Henks said this consisted of about 10 acres. Chair Lorberbaum commented on the differences on elevation and believes this is a creative use of the property. Chair Lorberbaum said she is not in favor of a clone of Town Center, but rather something more diverse. Chair Lorberbaum shared some comments made from Commissioners Hesse: • Has the applicant considered potential noise levels generated by Highway 110 and the effect the noise levels may have on the occupants of the buildings being proposed. I think this would be critical, especially for the restaurant in the northwest corner of the proposed development proposing outdoor dining. �] Planning Commission Meeting March 25, 2003 • I'd like to see some results of noise modeling, or some argument that shows that noise levels will not be a problem relative to the proposed outdoor uses of the property, i.e. outdoor dining, walking areas, etc. • A]ot of time and effort was spent on a final design of Town Center, and I believe everyone is very happy with it. It would be a shame to not hold this proposal to the same standards as Town Center. • I agree with Staff and suggest the applicant be given the strong recommendation to reassess the proposed design in light of the thought put into the final design put into Town Center. • Will the applicant be willing to give any thought of a proposed physical connection to Town Center, ie bridged walkway, paths, etc. Chair Lorberbaum shared some comments made from Commissioner Miller: • I would support anything that would be lead to a facelift to the existing Mendota Plaza. • I do not mind that the proposed development is significantly different than the Town Center project. • I think developing different styles will lead to more business and retail options for the consumers. • I do think the corner of Dodd Road and Highway 110 is an important corridor for the city and should be a well-balanced design drawing consumers to the retail center of the city. • I would support the concept PUD and would like to see additional information. Do we have any issues with too much coming online too fast for consumers to absorb and support. Commissioner polan expressed his concern with the sufficiency of the Dodd Road entrance. Commissioner polan asked if the future development land is included in the green space of 30%. Ms. Anderson said it was not and they have far exceeded the requirement to about 41 %. Commissioner polan asked if there were any discussions with the city regarding the entrance off Highway 110. Mr. Henks said they have not. Commissioner polan said it would be nice to have the trail connection and agrees that the parking could be changed to eliminate the size of the existing parking space. Commissioner M. McManus said one of the things she hopes will occur is something that will compliment the Town Center and appreciates the need to have something different. Commissioner M. McManus said she would like to see the developer come back with mare detail and a better idea of what the "look" might be. Commissioner M. McManus asked about a mixed use development; and that the proposal addresses retail development, with little consideration on housing. Ms. Anderson said this phase will all be all retail/commercial. Commissioner M. McManus asked what would happen with the existing strip mall look, and would like to see some plans upfront. If this is to be considered a"gateway" development, these issues need to be addressed as well. Commissioner M. McManus said she appreciates the design as it is spread out, but it doesn't give connection to all the areas. Commissioner M. McManus said she does not like to "back door" aspect as she sees it. 20 Planning Commission Meeting March 25, 2003 Commissioner M. McManus said another major consideration will be working with MnDOT and funding. Commissioner B. McManus said the greatest piece of wisdom came from someone who is not present at this meeting, and suggested to move the restaurant away from the highway as far as possible, perhaps flip flopping with a retail unit. Ms. Anderson said many developments they have worlced on, the restaurants' will take a different view as most people coming into the area will see people enjoying the patios does a lot for a center. Commissioner B. McManus said a lot of money in being spent on the bridge over the pond. Ms. Anderson said different centers with similar amenities narrow the culvert, but spend most of the money on decorative features, and there are many cost effective measures that can be taking when grading the land. Commissioner B. McManus asked what the alternative will be should Dodge Nature Center fail to cooperate. Mr. Henk said they would have to work on reorientation and reassess the access situation. Dave Napier, representative from Dodge Nature Center, said he wanted to make everyone aware that he was present at the meeting to see what is going on. Mr. Napier said he has met with the Pasters to look at the concepts and as a nature center, obviously the mission is to preserve and protect land and be good stewards of the land. Mr. Napier said with that in mind, the nature center has decided to exercise that right and look into pursuing the land. The nature center does not have the money at this time, but they are working with MnDOT to see what it would cost to purchase the land. The 175 acre parcel is currently under a restoration plan. Chair Lorberbaum said the Commission will take whatever concept comes to them from either the nature center or Paster Enterprises LLC and evaluate it at that point. Mr. Napier said once the information is obtained, they will have the necessary committees discuss. Critical Area Ordinance Discussion Chair Larberbaum said due to the large agenda for this meeting, this discussion has been tabled to a meeting that will have a much smaller agenda. VERBAL REVIEW Mr. Danielson said there are no cases to report. Mr. Danielson reminded Commission members to keep all their materials for the Burow Farm and Michael Bader cases to refer to at the April meeting. COMMISSIONER BETLEJ MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER DOLAN, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 11:05 PM Respectfully submitted, Becki Shaffer, Recording Secretary 21